5 ms·
There are some areas where relational DBs simply have no place at all, and never had. For example, CADs always relied on the hierarchical database engines, and
by sklogic 11y ago
There are some areas where relational DBs simply have no place at all, and never had. For example, CADs always relied on the hierarchical database engines, and it should always stay this way.
This new hipster relational model is not nearly as universal as its proponents are claiming.
- hobarrera 11y agoMuch like the relational model isn't universal, neither is the nosql model, and that's exactly the point. It keeps being adopted in places where sql is the right solution.
- threeseed 11y agoEspecially when there is no such thing as "the NoSQL model". MongoDB, Cassandra, HBase, Redis etc have completely different ways of storing and retrieving data. And for those of us accessing these databases via Big Data technologies e.g. Spark/Hive they appear as 100% SQL databases. The point here is that blanket statements are stupid. Especially when the line between NoSQL/SQL is completely grey now.
- sklogic 11y agoI'd consider it a kind of revenge. Previously we had to deal with an unwelcome invasion of SQL into the areas it's not suitable for, now the SQL guys have to fence off an invasion of document-, graph-, hierarchical- and whatever else models. Once dust is settled on this battlefield, the world will become a better place, where more people are aware of their tools limits.