This is nonsense and the person who was advocating for implementation-aware transpilation is completely wrong.
It is the role of a database engine implementation to service useful queries. Sometimes those queries are very complex; and yes, pipe syntax allows users to more easily write queries that can challenge database performance.
Yet this totally misses the point. Technologies like LookML have long allowed for extremely useful yet complicated queries to be executed by a database engine (often against one that is exceptional at complex analytical queries, like BigQuery) with high performance.
We should never handicap a SQL user’s ability to do what they want in the most ergonomic way. Transpilation largely allows for this — and I am 100% certain that implementations that allow for pipe syntax will effectively merely transform an AST with pipes to an existing kind of AST (this is, of course, effectively transpilation).
It is the job of the database engine, not the one querying (within reason) to performantly execute a query — and ditto for a pipe->non-pipe SQL transpiler. If you disagree with this, you are ignoring the fact that BigQuery, Snowflake, Redshift, and other optimized analytical databases are collectively worth billions, largely for their ability to performantly service crazy yet useful queries.
It is the role of a database engine implementation to service useful queries. Sometimes those queries are very complex; and yes, pipe syntax allows users to more easily write queries that can challenge database performance.
Yet this totally misses the point. Technologies like LookML have long allowed for extremely useful yet complicated queries to be executed by a database engine (often against one that is exceptional at complex analytical queries, like BigQuery) with high performance.
We should never handicap a SQL user’s ability to do what they want in the most ergonomic way. Transpilation largely allows for this — and I am 100% certain that implementations that allow for pipe syntax will effectively merely transform an AST with pipes to an existing kind of AST (this is, of course, effectively transpilation).
It is the job of the database engine, not the one querying (within reason) to performantly execute a query — and ditto for a pipe->non-pipe SQL transpiler. If you disagree with this, you are ignoring the fact that BigQuery, Snowflake, Redshift, and other optimized analytical databases are collectively worth billions, largely for their ability to performantly service crazy yet useful queries.