Skip to content

Comment on Message threading (1997-2002)

Comments

Very insightful article. I do wonder though if "say no to databases" still stands as of now. I agree that performance-wise files are hard to beat for most problems, but we're storing data in databases because they provide guarantees a filesystem doesn't, eases deployment and configuration, etc.

The problem with Netscape 4 was that it introduced a database that was (in theory) human readable, but poorly specified, buggy and inconsistent. If you are going to change then things should be better on at least one axis, and preferably no regressions on the others. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mork_(file_format)

It is also worth pointing out this era predated SQLite.

There's been a movement away from flat files even (perhaps, especially) among the kinds of people who like old-school Unix CLI and console tools for mail. There hasn't been a lot of movement in tools that directly read a Maildir or mbox, partly because searching is painfully slow. Instead, people are now building on top of things like notmuch: http://notmuchmail.org/

I don't read it as "say no to databases," but "stop putting square pegs in round holes."

Too many programmers find a Next Greatest Thing and then try to reconfigure problems to fit the newfound solution. Too many managers "need" solutions that are buzzword-compliant. Combine these and you get projects that are "written in C++ and use databases" and are thus a success regardless of whether they work.

It stands up well for in-memory tasks where doing the simplest-thing-that-could-possibly-work is too slow.

The union of those two things is probably not a big component of most people's daily work though. Computers are fast now, you can get away with a lot of naive code.

AboutSource Built by g1lg1l

Hackerly is an independent reader for Hacker News, built on the public HN API. Not affiliated with Y Combinator.