Scott Meyers wants to bring default zero-initialization to C++, mentions TDPL for precedent

[Ola Fosheim Grøstad via Digitalmars-d]

On Sunday, 22 November 2015 at 01:53:01 UTC, Chris Wright wrote:
> There's nothing inherent in having a rigid schema or using SQL 
> as a query language that prevents scaling.

That's right, except that joins and desirable consistency 
requirements creates a ceiling when it comes to scaling. It does 
so  on NOSQL databases too, but you tend to avoid those there by 
making joins "manual labour". A database like BigTable does 
encourage two fundamental concepts:

1. eventual consistency, meaning:
- indexes are out of date
- reads based on identity are up to date

2. transactions and consistency on shared ancestors, meaning:
- transactions acts on a hierarchical database structure 
(hierarchical data bases have always been more performant than 
relational, but the latter is more convenient).

3. massively frequent updates and infrequent queries are handled 
by representing a single object as many objects (sharding) (like 
voting in an election)

The relational model is flat and flexible, but is resistant to 
scaling.

> Oracle, in contrast, is nearly forty. A system designed 
> originally to scale to PDP-11s requires extensive effort and 
> redesign to scale to scale as well as modern applications 
> require.

The main challenge is to break relationships with consistency 
requirements across compute-nodes (servers).

> designed) when we already had algorithms like RAFT and a lot of 
> experience with distributed systems.

Looks interesting, but I don't see how it helps with the 
fundamental model used in RDBMSes?