4 ms·
My favorite part of the rant is the suggestion that the nosql alternative to spending millions on a ginormous RDBMS was throwing away throughput by using Amazon
by evgen 17y ago
My favorite part of the rant is the suggestion that the nosql alternative to spending millions on a ginormous RDBMS was throwing away throughput by using Amazon AWS. I guess any argument becomes easier to make when you define the other side by its incompetence.
The only valid point made seems to be that vertical scaling of a RDBMS can be a multi-million dollar exercise.
- wmf 17y agoUnfortunately, what you call incompetence a lot of other people call best practice.
- evgen 17y agoIf throughput and transaction/analysis speed is a requirement then AWS is not the answer -- anyone who suggests otherwise has never used it for anything larger than a toy dataset. I am currently migrating a large data analysis system (20+ TB running over about 500 EC2 hadoop workers) to a dedicated cluster because the internal EC2 latency reached a tipping point in our analysis runs. If you have the dough to spend on a big vertical system you can spend half as much on a dedicated cluster running a NoSQL solution and probably meet the required spec. The original article was comparing a Porsche Cayenne to a bicycle; the bicycle works for some problems and in certain cases it (or a fleet of them) can solve the problem better, but it was a dishonest strawman comparison for the subject at hand.