I’m a tech interested guy. I’ve touched SQL once or twice, but wasn’t able to really make sense of it. That combined with not having a practical use leaves SQL as largely a black box in my mind (though I am somewhat familiar with technical concepts in databasing).

With that, I keep seeing [pic related] as proof that Elon Musk doesn’t understand SQL.

Can someone give me a technical explanation for how one would come to that conclusion? I’d love if you could pass technical documentation for that.

  • snooggums@lemmy.worldEnglish
    4·
    8 days ago

    His post (if we believe it) demonstrates he must have access to both pieces of information.

    At best he is referring to an older mainframe he is aware of not being sql while being completely oblivious of all the government systems that are in sql.

    Which isn’t giving him any credit, because in that case he is atill running his mouth based on being ignorant about other government systems.

    I submitted data to a government database yesterday that I know for a fact is sql because we have had an ongoing years long relationship that involves improving that system and aligning our state level sql database. The government absolutely uses sql frequently, even if they still have older mainframes with some other database architecture.

    • r00ty@kbin.life
      1·
      8 days ago

      The government absolutely uses sql frequently, even if they still have older mainframes with some other database architecture.

      This makes more sense. But even then they would surely transfer data from the old system over.

      I mean I’m liking the idea that they went down into the basement, started up an old mini computer, with “superman 3” magnetic tapes with data from the 1980s to force them to try to integrate with that and only after transferring the data at 1000cps, find out it’s entirely out of date.

      I mean, it won’t be the case, but I’d really like it to be. 😛

      • snooggums@lemmy.worldEnglish
        2·
        8 days ago

        This makes more sense. But even then they would surely transfer data from the old system over.

        All you gotta do is snap your fingers!

        Moving data from system to system is a massive undertaking. It probably needs to be restructured, and decisions made during the process will be found to be imperfect and adjustments will need to be made along the way.

        Then you have to change all the connections to other systems and recreate the existing reports and by the way the changed structure impacts all of that and you need to revisit why you have all this stuff snd why don’t we just leave it alone after all.

        There is a reason that legacy systems stick around. I’m sure they have legacy mainframes with financial data. At my state office we have a financial mainframe we have been wanting to get rid of for over a decade and while we have peeled off what processes we can there is still a ton left to do. Nothing about it is easy compared to creating something new from scratch, in fact transitioning to a new system to replace an old system is probably ten times as much work. Not to mention you still have to use and maintain the old system the entire time!