> Ah, "no true Scotsman" rears its head again. Why limit the space to SQL databases?
"SQL" is probably generally less important than relational, but either might be an important category.
> Many applications that need an embeddable database don't specifically need SQL.
And yet, many do, or at least need a relational store. To make comparisons, you have to define the category you are making them within; of course, any such category may not be the appropriate one for some comparisons -- either too narrow, too broad, or the right size but divided on the wrong axis -- but that's a matter of where the comparison is relevant. OTOH, its simply wrong to say that a claim is wrong simply because it isn't based on your preferred categorization.
It's equally wrong to say the claim is correct because it's based on somebody else's preferred categorization. Do you see "SQL" anywhere in "small, fast, reliable"? They made a broad claim. They should be the ones to provide evidence or clarification. Why are those standards only applied to those who point out that the claim is unproven? That seems a lot like changing the terms of the argument (asymmetrically!) to fit a preordained conclusion.
> Do you see "SQL" anywhere in "small, fast, reliable"?
I see it all over the place -- the front page of SQLite.org -- where the motto "Small. Fast. Reliable. Choose any three." is presented. Here's the first paragraph of body text from the page:
(emphasis added) "SQLite is a software library that implements a self-contained, serverless, zero-configuration, transactional SQL database engine. SQLite is the most widely deployed SQL database engine in the world. The source code for SQLite is in the public domain."
The place they are telling you that the context is "SQL database engines" rather than just "database engines" is the same place they tell you that the context is something related to database engines as opposed to, say, automobiles.
"SQL" is probably generally less important than relational, but either might be an important category.
> Many applications that need an embeddable database don't specifically need SQL.
And yet, many do, or at least need a relational store. To make comparisons, you have to define the category you are making them within; of course, any such category may not be the appropriate one for some comparisons -- either too narrow, too broad, or the right size but divided on the wrong axis -- but that's a matter of where the comparison is relevant. OTOH, its simply wrong to say that a claim is wrong simply because it isn't based on your preferred categorization.