This is paramount for performance.
If autocompletion is your issue, just get a better client, it's perfectly possible to autocomplete field names even before specifying database or table name.
This is paramount for performance.
If autocompletion is your issue, just get a better client, it's perfectly possible to autocomplete field names even before specifying database or table name.
The problem is that SQL forces you to think about what to select before you even say where you're selecting from. There's nothing a client can do to recommend columns if it doesn't know where you're selecting from. It's pretty cumbersome to have to SELECT * FROM x and then go back and erase the * to actually get auto-completions.
It basically forces you to tell it what you want before you even know what the options are.
I know that from the interpreter's standpoint, it doesn't matter which one is written first.
What I meant is that as a human, if you have to think first of the columns you want to bring in, it will guide you towards the joins that you need and only those, rather than thinking "let me join all those tables because I need _some_ data from the entities inside".
My point about "autocompletion is still position" was not connected to the first part of my comment.
I just added it as a separate point, to say "you can have autocomplete no matter the order in which you write your query"...