Hubbry Logo
Query languageQuery languageMain
Open search
Query language
Community hub
Query language
logo
7 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Contribute something
Query language
Query language
Query language
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia

A query language, also known as data query language or database query language (DQL), is a computer language used to make queries in databases and information systems. In database systems, query languages rely on strict theory to retrieve information.[1] A well known example is the Structured Query Language (SQL).

Types

[edit]

Broadly, query languages can be classified according to whether they are database query languages or information retrieval query languages. The difference is that a database query language attempts to give factual answers to factual questions, while an information retrieval query language attempts to find documents containing information that is relevant to an area of inquiry. Other types of query languages include:

  • Full-text. The simplest query language is treating all terms as bag of words that are to be matched with the postings in the inverted index and where subsequently ranking models are applied to retrieve the most relevant documents. Only tokens are defined in the CFG. Web search engines often use this approach.
  • Boolean. A query language that also supports the use of the Boolean operators AND, OR, NOT.
  • Structured. A language that supports searching within (a combination of) fields when a document is structured and has been indexed using its document structure.
  • Natural language. A query language that supports natural language by parsing the natural language query to a form that can be best used to retrieve relevant documents, for example with Question answering systems or conversational search.

Examples

[edit]

See also

[edit]

References

[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

Query language

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
A query language is a specialized language designed to make requests (queries) into and information systems for the purpose of retrieving, manipulating, and managing . These languages enable users to interact with structured or stores by specifying selection criteria, often in a declarative manner that describes what data is needed rather than how to retrieve it. The development of query languages traces back to the , emerging from foundational work in theory. In 1970, IBM researcher published a seminal paper introducing the , which laid the groundwork for systematic data querying. SQL (Structured Query Language), the most widely adopted query language, was initially developed by in the early as SEQUEL (Structured English QUEry Language) to support relational databases like System R. By 1979, (then Relational Software, Inc.) released the first commercial SQL-based relational database management system, standardizing SQL as the language for data operations. Over the decades, SQL evolved through ANSI and ISO standards (e.g., SQL-86, ), incorporating features for data definition, manipulation, and control, while alternatives like QUEL appeared in the but were eventually overshadowed by SQL's dominance. Query languages encompass various types tailored to different data models and use cases, broadly categorized as declarative (specifying desired results) or imperative (detailing retrieval steps). The primary subtypes include for retrieving data, for modifying it, and extensions like for schema management, all integral to SQL. Beyond relational systems, notable examples include query languages for (e.g., Query Language), for API-driven flexible queries, for RDF data, and domain-specific ones like SPL for machine data analysis. Today, query languages are essential in , , and AI applications, powering everything from to real-time .

Definition and Purpose

Core Definition

A query language is a specialized used to retrieve, manipulate, and manage data stored in or information systems, abstracting away the precise algorithmic steps required for execution. This formalism enables users to define queries as functions that input a or set of facts and output a relevant subset or derived facts, focusing on the logical specification of data needs rather than implementation details. Central to query languages is their declarative nature, which allows users to specify what is desired—such as particular meeting certain criteria—while the underlying determines how to efficiently compute and deliver it. This contrasts with procedural approaches, promoting higher-level abstractions that enhance and enable optimization by the . Query languages typically encompass both retrieval and manipulation operations; for example, in SQL, the (DQL) subset handles read-centric activities like extraction and analysis via SELECT statements, while the (DML) subset supports modifications such as insertions and updates via INSERT, UPDATE, and DELETE. This integrated focus facilitates efficient exploration and management in large-scale systems. At their core, query languages comprise query expressions that articulate the intended output, operators for tasks like selection (filtering records) and projection (specifying attributes), and result sets that encapsulate the processed in a structured format. These elements collectively form a syntax and semantics tailored for precise interaction.

Applications in Data Systems

Query languages serve as the foundational interface for interacting with data in relational database management systems (RDBMS), where languages like SQL enable users to retrieve, manipulate, and manage structured data stored in tables. In NoSQL databases, query languages such as Cypher for graph databases or MongoDB's query API support flexible data models, including document, key-value, and column-family stores, facilitating operations on unstructured or semi-structured data. Search engines employ query languages based on keyword, Boolean, and natural language constructs to perform information retrieval from vast textual corpora, powering ranked result delivery in systems like web search platforms. Knowledge graphs utilize specialized query languages like SPARQL for RDF-based structures or Cypher for property graphs, allowing traversal and pattern matching across interconnected entities to support semantic querying. In business intelligence tools, query languages play a pivotal role in data retrieval for analytics, reporting, and decision-making by extracting insights from operational databases and data warehouses. For instance, SQL-based queries integrate with platforms like Tableau or Power BI to aggregate metrics, generate dashboards, and enable predictive analytics that inform strategic choices in organizations. This capability streamlines the transformation of raw data into actionable reports, enhancing efficiency in sectors such as and healthcare. Query languages integrate seamlessly with APIs for web services, allowing SQL extensions to mash up data from multiple relational sources and external endpoints in a unified query environment. In platforms, they extend to distributed systems like Hadoop via HiveQL for SQL-like querying on HDFS-stored data, and cloud services such as AWS , which uses standard SQL to analyze petabyte-scale datasets in S3 without infrastructure management. These languages offer benefits including high efficiency in processing large datasets through optimized execution plans and declarative paradigms that abstract low-level details, focusing instead on what data to retrieve. Additionally, they support ad-hoc querying, enabling on-the-fly analysis without predefined schemas, which is essential for exploratory and rapid prototyping in dynamic environments.

Historical Development

Origins in Relational Databases

The origins of query languages are deeply rooted in the of data, proposed by in his seminal 1970 paper, which formalized databases as collections of relations (tables) composed of tuples (rows) and attributes (columns), emphasizing and logical structure over physical storage. This model laid the theoretical groundwork for querying by introducing as a procedural foundation for data manipulation, but it was the non-procedural relational calculi—specifically (focusing on selecting tuples satisfying predicates) and domain relational calculus (emphasizing domain variables and conditions)—developed in Codd's 1972 work on relational completeness, that served as key precursors to declarative query languages. These calculi provided a formal, logic-based means to express queries without specifying retrieval steps, enabling completeness in expressing any relational algebra operation and influencing the design of practical sublanguages for database interaction. Building on this foundation, early practical query languages emerged within IBM's research efforts to implement the . In 1975, and introduced SQUARE (Specifying Queries as Relational Expressions), a sublanguage designed for querying in , which directly translated operations into a textual form but relied heavily on , subscripts, and complex expressions that proved cumbersome for non-experts. To address these usability challenges, the same researchers simplified SQUARE into SEQUEL (Structured English Query Language) in 1974, adopting a more readable, English-like syntax while retaining declarative semantics inspired by the relational calculi, and integrating it as the query interface for IBM's System R prototype—a pioneering developed to demonstrate Codd's concepts in a working environment. By the late 1970s, SEQUEL transitioned to SQL (Structured Query Language) due to a trademark conflict with the existing SEQUEL name held by an unrelated company, prompting IBM to shorten it while preserving its core features. This evolution marked the shift from research prototypes to commercial viability, with Relational Software, Inc. (later Oracle Corporation) releasing the first production implementation of SQL in Oracle Version 2 in 1979, enabling structured queries on relational data in a multi-user setting and setting the stage for widespread adoption.

Evolution and Standardization

The evolution of query languages, building on early relational concepts, accelerated in the with the formal of SQL as a core query mechanism for relational databases. In 1986, the (ANSI) approved the first SQL standard, designated ANSI X3.135-1986, which defined essential syntax for data definition, manipulation, and control operations, including SELECT, INSERT, UPDATE, and DELETE statements. This standard was adopted internationally by the (ISO) in 1987 as ISO/IEC 9075:1987, promoting portability and consistency across database systems. The 1990s marked significant expansions to the SQL standard, enhancing its expressiveness and applicability. The SQL-92 standard (ISO/IEC 9075:1992), also known as SQL2, introduced features such as outer joins for handling unmatched rows in queries, improved support for views and schemas, and new data types like DATE, TIME, and , while defining conformance levels (Entry, Intermediate, Full) to guide implementations. Building on this, SQL:1999 (ISO/IEC 9075:1999), or SQL3, incorporated object-relational extensions including user-defined types, , and recursive queries via common table expressions (CTEs), allowing complex hierarchical data retrieval without procedural code. Subsequent revisions continued to evolve SQL for modern data needs. SQL:2003 added support for XML data querying and manipulation. Later versions, including SQL:2008 and SQL:2011, enhanced analytical processing with improved window functions and temporal data handling. SQL:2016 introduced data type and functions for . The most recent, SQL:2023 (ISO/IEC 9075:2023), further expanded capabilities and added enhancements for property graphs and matching in JSON contexts. As query languages matured, domain-specific extensions emerged to address limitations in handling non-relational data and procedural logic, alongside alternatives to SQL. For instance, QUEL (Query Language), developed in the late 1970s for the Ingres database system at UC Berkeley and based on relational calculus, offered a more mathematical syntax and was used commercially in the 1980s but was eventually supplanted by SQL's growing dominance and English-like readability. For XML data, the W3C standardized XQuery 1.0 in 2007 as a functional query language for retrieving and transforming XML documents, complementing SQL by supporting path expressions and FLWOR (For-Let-Where-Order-Return) constructs. Concurrently, integration with procedural elements gained traction; for instance, Oracle introduced PL/SQL in 1992 with Oracle7, extending SQL with blocks, variables, loops, and exception handling for server-side programming. Database vendors further influenced standardization through proprietary evolutions that extended core SQL while aiming for partial compliance. Microsoft's (T-SQL), originating from the 1989 Sybase-Microsoft partnership for SQL Server and fully developed by after 1993, added procedural constructs like cursors and error handling, alongside extensions for analytics such as window functions in later versions. Similarly, Oracle's evolved as a robust procedural layer, enabling stored procedures and triggers that influenced subsequent ISO standards on persistent stored modules. These developments balanced innovation with interoperability, shaping query languages into versatile tools for enterprise data management.

Recent Advancements

The 2010s marked a significant shift in query languages with the rise of , addressing the limitations of relational models in handling interconnected data. Cypher, developed by engineers in 2011, emerged as a declarative query language specifically designed for property graph databases, enabling and traversal operations that are intuitive for graph structures. This innovation laid the groundwork for broader adoption of graph querying, culminating in the of as ISO/IEC 39075 in April 2024, which defines operations for creating, querying, and maintaining property graphs in a vendor-neutral manner. draws heavily from Cypher's syntax while incorporating elements from other graph languages, promoting across graph database systems. Parallel to graph advancements, databases prompted adaptations in query paradigms to support flexible, schema-less data models. The Query Language (MQL), integral to since its initial release in August 2009, uses JSON-like documents for querying, allowing operations like aggregation pipelines and without rigid schemas. Similarly, the Cassandra Query Language (CQL), introduced in 2011 for , mimics SQL syntax to query wide-column stores, facilitating distributed data manipulation across clusters with commands for keyspace management and conditional updates. These adaptations enabled scalable querying in non-relational environments, influencing hybrid systems that blend NoSQL flexibility with familiar SQL-like interfaces. API-centric query languages further evolved data access in web and architectures. , open-sourced by in 2015, introduced a flexible querying mechanism where clients specify exact data requirements via a single endpoint, reducing over-fetching and under-fetching common in REST APIs. This approach, now widely adopted by platforms like and , supports introspection and through definitions, streamlining client-server interactions in distributed applications. Integrations with have transformed query generation by bridging and structured queries. From 2023 onward, (LLM)-based tools have enabled for automatic SQL or query generation, with examples like Uber's QueryGPT (2024) using LLMs and vector search to convert English questions into executable database queries, improving accessibility for non-experts. Complementary innovations include PRQL, a pipelined relational query language developed in the early , which compiles to SQL and emphasizes readable, chainable expressions over nested subqueries to enhance maintainability in analytical workflows. Cloud-native systems have advanced distributed query capabilities through SQL extensions tailored for massive . , a data platform launched in 2014, has iteratively extended SQL in the with features like dynamic table functions and vector search support, optimizing queries across distributed warehouses for real-time on petabyte-scale data without traditional indexing overhead. These enhancements facilitate seamless federated querying over hybrid environments, underscoring the trend toward unified, elastic .

Key Characteristics

Declarative vs. Procedural Paradigms

Query languages predominantly adopt the declarative paradigm, where users specify the desired results—what data to retrieve or manipulate—without dictating the method of execution. The underlying database management system (DBMS) optimizer then determines the optimal execution plan, including choices like join orders, index usage, and parallelization, based on system statistics and constraints. This paradigm is exemplified by set-based operations inspired by , such as selections, projections, and unions, which treat data as mathematical sets rather than sequential records, enabling concise expressions of complex queries. In contrast, the procedural paradigm requires explicit step-by-step instructions for accessing and processing data, akin to where and operations are fully prescribed by the user. Although less prevalent in pure query languages due to their complexity and reduced flexibility, procedural elements persist in extensions like SQL cursors, which facilitate iterative, row-by-row traversal of result sets for tasks requiring ordered processing or dynamic decision-making. These mechanisms allow fine-grained control but often lead to less efficient, harder-to-optimize code compared to set-based alternatives. The dominance of the declarative paradigm stems from its key advantages: enhanced portability, as queries remain valid across diverse DBMS implementations without modification for underlying storage or hardware differences; superior performance optimization, where the engine automatically generates efficient plans that outperform manually tuned procedural equivalents in most scenarios; and clear separation of concerns, isolating logical query intent from physical execution details to improve maintainability and reduce developer burden. Theoretically, declarative query languages are grounded in relational calculus, a non-procedural formalism that defines queries through logical predicates on relations, offering equivalent expressive power to the procedural relational algebra without specifying operational sequences. Relational algebra, introduced by E.F. Codd, serves as the procedural foundation with its explicit operators for data manipulation, mirroring the step-wise control of imperative loops in general programming languages like C or Java. This duality, formalized in Codd's work on relational completeness, underscores why declarative approaches prevail in modern database systems for their balance of power and abstraction.

Syntax and Semantic Elements

Query languages are constructed using a formal syntax that includes predefined keywords, operators, and clauses to articulate data selection, filtering, and manipulation instructions. Keywords such as SELECT and FROM delineate the projection of desired attributes and the specification of data sources, respectively, forming the foundational structure of most queries. Logical operators like AND and OR enable the combination of conditions, while comparison operators including = and > facilitate precise filtering based on relational predicates. Clauses such as WHERE for conditional filtering and GROUP BY for aggregation organize the query logic, ensuring systematic processing of input data. Semantically, query languages define mappings from underlying data models—such as relations or graphs—to output result sets, where the interpretation of a query determines the exact transformation applied. In the , these semantics embody closure properties, whereby algebraic operations on relations yield relations, thereby preserving the model's throughout . Expressiveness is a key semantic attribute, exemplified by the completeness of , which equivalently captures all queries formulable in , ensuring no loss of representational power. Common patterns in query languages include for identifying structural similarities in , joins for integrating across multiple relations or entities, and aggregation functions such as and SUM for condensing datasets into summary metrics. Pattern matching employs symbolic representations, often using wildcards or regular expressions, to locate conforming elements within records or nodes. Joins, typically categorized as inner, outer, or equi-joins, merge datasets based on shared attributes, enabling relational composition without data duplication. Aggregation functions apply over grouped data to compute scalar values, supporting analytical operations like totals or averages in result sets. Challenges in query language design encompass ambiguity in natural language interfaces, where polysemous terms or contextual nuances can yield multiple valid interpretations, thus hindering precise query translation. In structured queries, type safety poses another hurdle, as mismatches between operand types may lead to runtime failures unless enforced by static checks or schema-aware compilation.

Classification by Type

Database Query Languages

Database query languages enable the retrieval, manipulation, and management of structured data within database systems, primarily focusing on relational models where data is organized into tables with predefined schemas. The cornerstone of these languages is SQL (Structured Query Language), a standardized developed for relational databases to perform (CRUD) operations, with (DQL) components emphasizing efficient read operations such as selecting and filtering data from tables. SQL and its variants, including those in systems like , , and , adhere to ANSI/ISO standards, allowing developers to express queries declaratively for consistent data interaction across RDBMS platforms. In non-relational or environments, query languages adapt to diverse models while retaining core principles of structured retrieval. Key-value stores, exemplified by , utilize command-based queries like GET, SET, and MGET to access stored as simple pairs, prioritizing speed for caching and session management. Document-oriented databases, such as , employ a JavaScript Object Notation ()-like query syntax to match and aggregate semi-structured documents, supporting operations akin to CRUD through methods like find() and update(). Column-family stores like use Query Language (CQL), a SQL-inspired syntax tailored for distributed wide-column , enabling inserts, selects, and updates across partitioned tables. Essential features of these query languages include support for ACID (Atomicity, Consistency, Isolation, ) compliance to guarantee transaction reliability, particularly in relational systems where SQL enforces data integrity during multi-statement operations. Indexing structures, such as or hash indexes in SQL and secondary indexes in variants, accelerate query execution by facilitating rapid lookups and reducing full-table scans. Transactional capabilities allow queries to bundle operations atomically, with rollback mechanisms in SQL and multi-document transactions in ensuring consistency in concurrent environments. These languages power enterprise by underpinning (OLTP) for real-time, high-throughput tasks like order processing and inventory updates, while also supporting (OLAP) for aggregating and analyzing large datasets in applications.

Information Retrieval Query Languages

Information retrieval (IR) query languages are designed to search and rank documents in large collections of unstructured or semi-structured text, emphasizing probabilistic relevance over exact matches. These languages enable users to express information needs through terms, operators, and modifiers that facilitate retrieval from corpora such as web pages, digital libraries, or enterprise archives. Unlike precise data extraction in structured databases, IR queries prioritize ranking documents by estimated relevance, often using statistical models to handle ambiguity and scale to billions of items. Boolean queries form the foundational logic in early IR systems, employing operators like AND, OR, and NOT to combine terms for exact set-based retrieval. For instance, a query such as "cat AND dog NOT bird" retrieves documents containing both "cat" and "dog" but excluding "bird," processed efficiently via inverted indexes that map terms to document lists. This model, prominent in systems like the SMART retrieval system from the 1960s, provides binary yes/no results without inherent ranking, making it suitable for precise filtering in controlled vocabularies but limited for vague user intents in full-text scenarios. Full-text and ranked retrieval extend Boolean capabilities by incorporating term weighting and proximity operators to score document relevance. In term-based approaches, queries use free-text keywords weighted by models like TF-IDF (Term Frequency-Inverse Document Frequency), where term frequency measures local importance within a document, and inverse document frequency downweights common terms across the corpus, enabling ranked lists ordered by or similar metrics. Proximity operators, such as "cat NEAR/5 dog," refine searches by requiring terms within a specified distance, improving precision in phrase-like queries. These elements, central to models, power modern search engines by addressing vocabulary mismatches and supporting . Structured elements in IR query languages allow field-specific searches to target metadata or document sections, enhancing precision in semi-structured collections. For example, queries like "title:quantum physics" restrict matching to titles, while "author:Einstein date:>1900" combines fields for temporal filtering, common in tools like web search engines or digital libraries. This approach leverages document schemas without full relational structure, bridging free-text and metadata-driven retrieval. The evolution of IR query languages has incorporated faceted search and to better capture user intent and support exploratory navigation. Faceted search presents results with navigable categories (facets) like or date, allowing progressive refinement of queries through selections that intersect with initial terms, originating from systems and advanced in tools like the interface. automatically augments user queries with related terms—via thesauri, co-occurrence analysis, or —to mitigate issues like synonymy or , as demonstrated in techniques from Rocchio's 1971 method and later surveys showing 7-14% improvements in benchmark tests. These advancements shift IR from rigid logic to interactive, intent-aware paradigms.

Emerging and Specialized Languages

In recent years, query languages for graph data have advanced to handle complex relational structures beyond traditional tabular models. Property graph query languages, such as Cypher and , enable traversals that navigate nodes and relationships to uncover patterns in interconnected data, supporting applications like and recommendation systems. For semantic web applications, RDF-based languages like facilitate querying distributed knowledge graphs by matching triples (subject-predicate-object) across heterogeneous sources, with the SPARQL 1.2 Working Draft (as of November 2025) enhancing federation and update capabilities for large-scale RDF datasets. The integration of large language models (LLMs) has given rise to natural language-driven query interfaces, allowing users to pose conversational questions that are automatically translated into executable code. Tools like Uber's QueryGPT, launched in 2024, leverage generative AI to convert prompts into SQL queries, improving accessibility for non-technical users in workflows. Recent advancements in text-to-SQL, as surveyed in 2025, demonstrate LLMs achieving up to 80% accuracy on benchmark datasets like by incorporating retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) to refine schema understanding and query synthesis. Domain-specific query languages address niche data paradigms, optimizing for performance in specialized environments. PromQL, the query language for , supports real-time aggregation of time-series metrics using functions like rate() and histogram_quantile() to monitor infrastructure and applications at scale. For AI embeddings in vector databases, query mechanisms often extend SQL with similarity operators (e.g., cosine distance in pgvector) or use dedicated syntax in systems like for approximate nearest neighbor searches over high-dimensional data. The (GQL), standardized by ISO/IEC 39075 in 2024, provides a unified declarative syntax for property graphs, enabling path traversals and in knowledge graphs while promoting across vendors. Emerging trends emphasize hybrid query languages that blend paradigms for polyglot persistence, where systems manage diverse data types within a single query interface. For instance, extensions like PostgreSQL's SQL/PGQ integrate graph traversals with relational joins, allowing unified queries over SQL tables and property graphs to support complex analytics in mixed workloads. This approach reduces data silos, as seen in 2025 hybrid models that combine vector embeddings with graph structures for enhanced retrieval-augmented generation in AI applications.

Notable Examples

Structured Query Language (SQL)

Structured Query Language (SQL) is a standardized designed for managing and querying data held in management systems (RDBMS). Originally developed by in the 1970s, it became an ANSI standard in 1986 and an international ISO standard in 1987, enabling declarative expressions for , manipulation, and control. SQL's widespread adoption stems from its simplicity and power in handling structured data through relational models, where data is organized into tables with rows and columns related via keys. As the de facto standard for relational databases, SQL underpins systems like , , , and SQL Server, facilitating operations from simple lookups to complex analytical queries. At its core, SQL syntax revolves around the SELECT-FROM-WHERE structure for querying data. The SELECT clause specifies the columns or expressions to retrieve, the FROM clause identifies the source tables, and the WHERE clause applies filtering conditions to rows. For example, to retrieve employee names from a department, one might use:

SELECT name FROM employees WHERE department = 'Sales';

SELECT name FROM employees WHERE department = 'Sales';

This basic form supports with GROUP BY and HAVING for conditional summaries. SQL also includes (DML) statements like INSERT, UPDATE, and DELETE for modifying data, and (DDL) commands like CREATE TABLE for schema management. To combine data from multiple tables, SQL employs JOIN operations, which link rows based on related columns. Common types include INNER JOIN, which returns only matching rows from both tables, and LEFT JOIN, which includes all rows from the left table and matching rows from the right, with NULLs for non-matches. An example INNER JOIN on customers and orders:

SELECT customers.name, orders.date FROM customers INNER JOIN orders ON customers.id = orders.customer_id;

SELECT customers.name, orders.date FROM customers INNER JOIN orders ON customers.id = orders.customer_id;

Subqueries enhance expressiveness by nesting one query within another, often in the WHERE clause for comparisons or in FROM for derived tables. For instance, a subquery might filter employees earning above the departmental average. Window functions, introduced in SQL:1999, perform calculations across row sets without grouping, using an OVER clause to define the window. The ROW_NUMBER() function assigns sequential numbers to rows within a partition, useful for ranking:

SELECT name, salary, ROW_NUMBER() OVER (PARTITION BY department ORDER BY salary DESC) AS rank FROM employees;

SELECT name, salary, ROW_NUMBER() OVER (PARTITION BY department ORDER BY salary DESC) AS rank FROM employees;

These features allow SQL to handle analytical tasks efficiently in relational contexts. SQL's evolution is tracked through successive ISO/IEC 9075 revisions, balancing core stability with new capabilities. The progression began with ANSI X3.135-1986 (SQL-86), focusing on basic relational operations, followed by enhancements in SQL-89 for integrity constraints and for fuller syntax including outer joins. Later versions added object-relational features: SQL:1999 introduced recursive queries and window functions; SQL:2003 supported XML data; SQL:2006 and SQL:2008 enhanced temporal and window support; SQL:2011 added temporal tables. SQL:2016 (ISO/IEC 9075-2016) notably incorporated support through functions like JSON_VALUE for extracting values from JSON documents stored in columns, enabling hybrid relational-NoSQL workloads. The latest, SQL:2023 (ISO/IEC 9075-2023), introduces property graph queries via clauses like for traversing graph structures directly in SQL, extending its reach to graph data without abandoning relational foundations. Database vendors extend the SQL standard to address domain-specific needs, often through proprietary functions while maintaining core compliance. , for instance, provides robust via the tsvector and tsquery types, integrated into SQL queries using operators like @@ for matching parsed text against search terms. This allows efficient indexing and ranking of textual content, as in:

SELECT title FROM articles WHERE to_tsvector('english', content) @@ to_tsquery('english', 'database & query');

SELECT title FROM articles WHERE to_tsvector('english', content) @@ to_tsquery('english', 'database & query');

Such extensions leverage PostgreSQL's indexes for performance on large corpora. MySQL offers spatial query extensions compliant with Open Geospatial Consortium (OGC) standards, supporting types like POINT, LINESTRING, and for storing and querying geospatial data. Functions such as ST_Distance compute metrics between features, enabling location-based queries like finding nearby points:

SELECT name FROM locations WHERE ST_Distance_Sphere(geom, POINT(40.7128, -74.0060)) < 10000;

SELECT name FROM locations WHERE ST_Distance_Sphere(geom, POINT(40.7128, -74.0060)) < 10000;

These build on MySQL's spatial indexes for efficient analysis in GIS applications. Despite its strengths, traditional SQL implementations in monolithic RDBMS face scalability limitations when handling big data volumes, such as petabyte-scale datasets or high-velocity streams, due to challenges in distributed processing, locking, and index maintenance that can lead to performance bottlenecks. These issues are mitigated in modern dialects like Google BigQuery's SQL, which leverages a serverless, columnar storage architecture with automatic sharding and massively parallel processing to query terabytes in seconds without managing infrastructure. BigQuery's extensions, such as scripting and machine learning integrations, further adapt SQL for cloud-scale analytics while preserving standard syntax.

Graph and NoSQL Query Languages

Graph query languages are designed to operate on graph data models, which represent entities as nodes and relationships as edges, enabling efficient traversal and pattern matching for interconnected data. Unlike relational approaches, these languages emphasize declarative specifications of graph patterns and traversals, facilitating queries over complex networks such as social graphs or recommendation systems. NoSQL query languages extend this paradigm to non-relational stores, supporting diverse data models like documents, key-value pairs, and semantic webs, while providing schema flexibility for big data environments. Cypher is a declarative query language developed for Neo4j, a leading property graph database, allowing users to express graph patterns and traversals in a readable, ASCII-art-inspired syntax. It focuses on pattern matching to retrieve connected data, such as identifying relationships between nodes, and is optimized for real-time queries in graph databases. For instance, the query MATCH (a:Person)-[:KNOWS]->(b:Person) RETURN a, b finds all pairs of connected by a "KNOWS" relationship, enabling efficient traversals without explicit joins. Cypher's design draws from SQL-like readability but prioritizes graph semantics, making it suitable for applications requiring deep relationship analysis. Gremlin serves as the graph traversal language for the Apache TinkerPop framework, supporting a wide range of graph databases through a functional, data-flow approach composed of sequential steps. It enables both imperative traversals for procedural control and declarative patterns for high-level queries, with operations like addV('person').property('name', 'Alice') to create vertices and outE('knows') to follow outgoing edges labeled "knows." This step-based model allows for complex path computations, such as shortest paths or community detection, and is embeddable in languages like or Python for versatile graph processing. 's Turing-complete nature supports both (OLTP) and (OLAP) workloads across TinkerPop-compatible systems. The (GQL), standardized as ISO/IEC 39075:2024, is a declarative language for querying property graph databases, serving as the analogous to SQL for relational data. Inspired by Cypher, it uses pattern-matching syntax for traversals, such as MATCH (n:Person)-[r:KNOWS]->(m:Person) RETURN n.name, m.name to retrieve connected persons, supporting efficient querying of complex relationships in graph stores. GQL enables vendor-neutral graph operations, including path finding and subgraph extraction, and is implemented in databases like and AWS as of 2025. In the NoSQL domain, languages like (ArangoDB Query Language) provide unified querying for multi-model databases that combine graphs, documents, and key-value stores. is declarative and SQL-inspired, supporting operations across heterogeneous data with features like traversals and aggregations in a single query, such as FOR v IN 1..3 INBOUND STARTVERTEX GRAPH 'social' OPTIONS {bfs: true} RETURN v.name for graph navigation. Similarly, is the W3C-standardized query language for RDF () data, treating it as directed labeled graphs for applications. It uses triple patterns for matching, as in SELECT ?subject WHERE { ?subject rdf:type :[Resource](/page/Resource) }, to retrieve resources of a specific type, with support for federated queries, filters, and constructs to build new RDF graphs. These languages enable flexible, scalable data access in distributed environments. Graph and NoSQL query languages offer distinct advantages over rigid relational systems, particularly in handling complex relationships through native traversals that avoid costly multi-table joins, achieving up to orders-of-magnitude performance gains in interconnected datasets. For example, graph databases like demonstrate superior efficiency in relationship-heavy queries compared to , as joins in SQL scale poorly with degree of connectivity. Additionally, their schema-less or flexible designs accommodate evolving data structures without migrations, supporting agile development in scenarios where relational schemas impose constraints. This flexibility is crucial for applications like fraud detection or knowledge graphs, where ad-hoc patterns and prevail.

References

  1. https://www.elastic.co/what-is/query-language
  2. https://www.splunk.com/en_us/blog/learn/query-languages.html
  3. https://www.cockroachlabs.com/blog/history-of-databases-distributed-sql/
  4. https://aws.amazon.com/what-is/sql/
  5. https://cacm.acm.org/research/50-years-of-queries/
  6. https://neo4j.com/blog/cypher-and-gql/imperative-vs-declarative-query-languages/
  7. https://aerospike.com/glossary/query-languages/
  8. https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/582153.582190
  9. https://www.korrekt.org/page/Query_languages
  10. https://www.cs.rochester.edu/courses/261/spring2018/lectures/l2.pdf
  11. https://www.geeksforgeeks.org/sql/sql-ddl-dql-dml-dcl-tcl-commands/
  12. https://web.eecs.utk.edu/~bvanderz/teaching/cs465Fa11/notes/chap1.html
  13. https://www.cs.rice.edu/~vardi/papers/stoc82.pdf
  14. https://open.ocolearnok.org/informationsystems/chapter/chapter-3-data-management-and-analytics-in-business/
  15. https://philarchive.org/archive/VARAOS-2
  16. https://people.ischool.berkeley.edu/~hearst/irbook/10/node6.html
  17. https://arxiv.org/abs/2305.14485
  18. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/389712458_Predictive_Analytics_in_Business_Intelligence_-How_machine_learning_models_can_enhance_decision-_making_using_SQL-based_analytics
  19. https://www.rasmussen.edu/degrees/technology/blog/how-sql-is-used-in-data-analytics/
  20. https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.5555/1880853.1880886
  21. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40537-018-0146-3
  22. https://cacm.acm.org/blogcacm/the-hadoop-ecosystems-continued-impact/
  23. https://escholarship.org/uc/item/731242kq
  24. https://eajournals.org/wp-content/uploads/Google-Scholar_Benjamin-King-Grace-Hall.pdf
  25. https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/362384.362685
  26. https://www.inf.unibz.it/~franconi/teaching/2006/kbdb/Codd72a.pdf
  27. https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/361219.361221
  28. https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/800296.811515
  29. https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/320455.320457
  30. https://www.ibm.com/think/topics/relational-databases
  31. https://docs.oracle.com/cd/B13789_01/server.101/b10759/intro001.htm
  32. https://blog.ansi.org/ansi/sql-incits-american-national-standard-adoptions/
  33. https://learnsql.com/blog/history-of-sql-standards/
  34. https://old.dbs.uni-leipzig.de/files/lehre/sql99-eisenberg-melton-sigmod-record99.pdf
  35. https://www.iso.org/standard/76583.html
  36. https://www.w3.org/TR/2007/REC-xquery-20070123/
  37. https://docs.oracle.com/en/database/oracle/oracle-database/18/cncpt/introduction-to-oracle-database.html
  38. https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/sql-server/blog/2012/02/15/new-video-the-history-of-sql-server/
  39. https://neo4j.com/docs/cypher-manual/current/introduction/cypher-overview/
  40. https://www.iso.org/standard/76120.html
  41. https://www.gqlstandards.org/
  42. https://www.mongodb.com/resources/products/mongodb-version-history
  43. https://cassandra.apache.org/doc/4.0/cassandra/cql/
  44. https://engineering.fb.com/2015/09/14/core-infra/graphql-a-data-query-language/
  45. https://www.uber.com/blog/query-gpt/
  46. https://prql-lang.org/
  47. https://www.snowflake.com/en/engineering-blog/new-sql-features-public-preview/
  48. https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/sql/t-sql/language-elements/declare-cursor-transact-sql?view=sql-server-ver17
  49. https://www.demandtalk.com/insights/it-infra/declarative-programming-alleviating-software-development-hurdles/
  50. https://developers.google.com/chart/interactive/docs/querylanguage
  51. https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/office/access-sql-basic-concepts-vocabulary-and-syntax-444d0303-cde1-424e-9a74-e8dc3e460671
  52. https://www.seas.upenn.edu/~zives/03f/cis550/codd.pdf
  53. https://www.di.ens.fr/~segoufin/Papers/Mypapers/DB-chapter.pdf
  54. https://docs.oracle.com/en/database/oracle/oracle-database/26/dwhsg/sql-pattern-matching-data-warehouses.html
  55. https://www.puppygraph.com/blog/graph-query-language
  56. https://arxiv.org/pdf/2202.10898
  57. https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/2807442.2807478
  58. https://kilthub.cmu.edu/articles/conference_contribution/A_Cup_of_ChaiSQL_Benefits_of_Type_Checking_for_SQL/25586823
  59. https://www.oracle.com/database/what-is-oltp/
  60. https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/architecture/data-guide/relational-data/online-analytical-processing
  61. https://nlp.stanford.edu/IR-book/html/htmledition/boolean-retrieval-1.html
  62. https://www.khoury.northeastern.edu/home/jaa/CSG339.06F/Lectures/boolean.pdf
  63. https://www.dcc.uchile.cl/~gnavarro/ps/mir99.2.pdf
  64. https://www.cs.cornell.edu/courses/cs732/2003sp/Papers/Fuhr2001.pdf
  65. https://www.iro.umontreal.ca/~nie/IFT6255/Books/FacetedSearch.pdf
  66. https://www.iro.umontreal.ca/~nie/IFT6255/carpineto-Survey-QE.pdf
  67. https://hypermode.com/blog/graph-query-languages
  68. https://neo4j.com/blog/knowledge-graph/rdf-vs-property-graphs-knowledge-graphs/
  69. https://www.w3.org/TR/sparql12-query/
  70. https://www.w3.org/2025/04/rdf-star-wg-charter.html
  71. https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.14778/3750601.3750696
  72. https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/machine-learning/build-your-gen-ai-based-text-to-sql-application-using-rag-powered-by-amazon-bedrock-claude-3-sonnet-and-amazon-titan-for-embedding/
  73. https://prometheus.io/docs/prometheus/latest/querying/basics/
  74. https://www.datacamp.com/blog/the-top-5-vector-databases
  75. https://neo4j.com/blog/cypher-and-gql/cypher-path-gql/
  76. https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/database/gql-the-iso-standard-for-graphs-has-arrived/
  77. https://arxiv.org/html/2510.10123v1
  78. https://www.jcc.com/index.php/resources/sql-standards
  79. https://blog.ansi.org/ansi/sql-standard-iso-iec-9075-2023-ansi-x3-135/
  80. https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/sql/relational-databases/performance/subqueries?view=sql-server-ver17
  81. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/329593276_The_new_and_improved_SQL2016_standard
  82. http://peter.eisentraut.org/blog/2023/04/04/sql-2023-is-finished-here-is-whats-new
  83. https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/textsearch.html
  84. https://hevodata.com/learn/bigquery-vs-sql-server/
  85. https://tinkerpop.apache.org/gremlin.html
  86. https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/1900008.1900067
  87. https://neo4j.com/docs/cypher-manual/current/introduction/
  88. https://neo4j.com/docs/getting-started/cypher/
  89. https://docs.arangodb.com/stable/aql/
  90. https://www.w3.org/TR/sparql11-query/
  91. https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3104031
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
Contribute something
User Avatar
No comments yet.