zlacker

>>heyden+(OP)
Previous submissions on the paper itself:

>>41321876 (first) >>41338877 (plenty of discussions)

I tried this new syntax and this seems a reasonable proposal for complex analytical queries. This new syntax probably does not change most simple transactional queries though. The syntax matches the execution semantic more closely, which means you less likely need to formulate query in a weird form to make query planner work as expected; usually users only need to move some pipe operators to more appropriate places.

>>summer+hO9
Kinda looks like a half-assed version of what PRQL does. Like, if we’re going to have nonstandard sql, let’s just fix a whole bunch of things, not just one or two?