This page is not created by, affiliated with, or supported by Slack Technologies, Inc.
2022-03-15
Channels
- # announcements (10)
- # asami (5)
- # babashka (49)
- # babashka-sci-dev (8)
- # beginners (25)
- # calva (98)
- # cider (2)
- # clj-kondo (22)
- # clojure (32)
- # clojure-dev (12)
- # clojure-europe (32)
- # clojure-nl (3)
- # clojure-spec (3)
- # clojure-uk (10)
- # clojurescript (12)
- # community-development (1)
- # conjure (71)
- # cursive (7)
- # datalog (6)
- # events (2)
- # figwheel-main (2)
- # fulcro (4)
- # jobs (2)
- # kaocha (3)
- # lsp (43)
- # membrane (12)
- # missionary (9)
- # off-topic (61)
- # pathom (7)
- # polylith (2)
- # reagent (38)
- # remote-jobs (4)
- # shadow-cljs (17)
- # specter (1)
- # tools-deps (38)
- # vim (51)
- # web-security (5)
So, was watching a nice presentation on the unfortunately named database Crux/XTDB… 🙂 Anyway, this was presented as a comparison and I’m not sure how to understand the bottom line here about “ad-hoc documents”. What are the limitations with Asami regarding data structures? (The presentation is about a year old, if it matters.)
Naming is hard 🙂 This is a fuzzy definition that should arguably be decomposed into a few rows, but essentially XT will handle (i.e. store and index) anything that can be round-tripped via https://github.com/ptaoussanis/nippy including byte-buffers, without the user having to provide a schema (e.g. arbitrary value types can co-exist under the same attribute) and without losing information (e.g. ordering of vector / cardinality-many values). The latest version of this table looks a little different https://clojurelog.github.io/