Because any kind of persistence updates/inserts/deletes represents in some sense a kind of state change in a database, it makes me wonder whether databases can be considered monads. We say the same about monads in functional programming.

What one can possibly gain or lose while designing a system with such thought process?


3 Answers 3


Not really.

A database is a facility for the structured and organized storage and retrieval of data. A monad is a way to communicate with that database in a manner that preserves functional purity.

Think of the monad as a converter from the pure, immutable, mathematical world of the functional programming language; to the impure, mutable world of I/O. Because your mutable side effects are sequestered behind the monad, you can "pretend" that you're still living in a perfect, immutable world on the other side of the monad.

But, at the end of the day, it's still just a monad. There can be anything on the mutable side of that monad: a database, a console, another computer running Eliza.

  • Monads have far broader uses than that. While I agree that the specific(!) monad the OP talks about is not super useful, sets do form monads. If you make a universal relation, then your entire database is represented by one set of tuples; it is a monadic value. While it's more useful to look at individual tables as sets and thus monadic values, this is not a triviality. do notation or monad comprehensions become a query language and monad laws become query optimization rules. Mar 18, 2016 at 16:42

Databases are frequently modeled as monads in functional programming. HaskellDb, Quill, Slick, and Doobie are some examples I'm aware of. You can argue there's a difference between the database itself and the programming interface to the database. I'm not sure that's a useful distinction in this context.

More precisely, an operation on a database table is frequently modeled as a monad. So the return function wraps some table representation (like a record or class) into an internal query form that can be used for further transformations (taking a record to a Query record for example). The bind function (called >>= in Haskell) transforms the wrapped query action using the given function. For example, adding a WHERE clause to the query.

Since most collection types are also monads, this enables treating database tables like regular collections. You can use the same simplifications you use for other monads: Control.Monad library, do notation, for comprehensions, composition, etc. The structure of your query is type checked. If you add macros to the mix, like Quill does, the SQL can be generated at compile time. It's quite a useful abstraction.

  • Since most collection types are also monads, this enables treating database tables like regular collections. Databases are an example of a collection type which isn't really a monad. (What database would return a be, for example?) Mar 21, 2016 at 6:30
  • I already addressed this in my answer. When a is a record, return a represents a database table. Granted, this is a restriction on the type of a, but it is still a monad. Other monads, like sets, have restrictions on the underlying type. This isn't some theory I'm spouting. People have implemented this and use it in real life production code. Mar 21, 2016 at 12:16
  • well, I would specify what category you're working in, since otherwise your answer is ambiguous. (Also, the set monad, for example, is quite difficult to work with in Haskell.) Mar 21, 2016 at 13:04

Usually, a Monad represents some sort of way of doing computations. For example, Maybe is a monad that enables computations to fail. [] is a computation that allows multiple results. IO is a monad that allows communication with the nebulous RealWorld.

A database isn't really that. You could have State DataBase, which would be a computation with one mutable variable (namely, a DataBase), but the DataBase itself probably can't been seen as monad.

Lookup return and >>=. Every monad needs to have these. Do databases have them?

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.