> I haven’t seen any evidence that “everything is a file” helps much in a world of web APIs and SQL databases
Well for one thing, such an abstraction enables you to avoid web apis and sql databases!
Well for one thing, such an abstraction enables you to avoid web apis and sql databases!
<>/mnt/sql/clone{
echo 'SELECT * from ...' >[1=0]
cat /mnt/sql/^`{read}^/data # or awk, or whatever
}
I mean, Postgres could offer an SSH interface as a dumb pipe to psql to just have you push text SQL queries in your application. But it doesn't, it offers a binary protocol over a network socket. All the database engines have had the same decision point and have basically gone down the same path of implementing a wire protocol over a persistent socket connection.
So yeah, I don't get what doing things this way would give me as either a service provider or a service consumer. It looks like video game achievements for OS development nerds, "unlocked 'everything is a file'." But it doesn't look like it actually enables anything meaningful.
For Plan 9, it's all the same, all using the same interfaces, with little library glue.
Opening a window, and running a command in it? Similar interfaces. Adding LSP to your editor? Got it, you mount it and write to the files.
Universal shared conventions are powerful.
In other words, the transport protocol is just not the hard part of anything.
There's a reason that the 9front implementation of things usually ends up at about 10% the size of the upstream.
You're thinking from the perspective of the terminal user—ie, a drooling, barely-conscious human trying to grasp syntax and legal oddities of long-dead humans. Instead you need to think from the perspective of a star trek captain. Presumably they aren't manually slinging sql queries. Such tasks are best automated. We are all the drooling terminal user in the end, but plan9 enabled you to at least pretend to be competent.
SQL certainly forces you to look at graphs as trees. Do you have an specific interface you're trying to access? If you're trying to use a graph database, why mention APIs and SQL?
And as Feynman said, you don't truly understand a thing until you can teach it. So that leaves us in a weird predicament where the biggest proponents of Plan 9 apparently don't understand Plan 9 well enough to teach it to the rest of us.
"Plan 9 praisers who don't actually use Plan 9" have a tendentious way of speaking, that's actually a lot like "AI slop", that Plan 9 users can instantly recognise. Telltale signs include speaking about Plan 9 in the past tense, and a belief that with Plan 9 you can somehow just strap all your computers together to get more performance or something. Because "you have 9P".
How do you do a join on Plan 9? I get the impression that these are coded in each client. But complicated queries need indexes and optimizer. SQL database has advantage that can feed it and it figures out the plan.
> If so, it is unsuitable for being a database. It can run databases, because those can work without transactions. But can't do native writes without them. Can it do transactional reads? How would you represent isolation levels?
Bruh ask 9front