5 ms·

Very good article, I myself have found the "NoSQL" label pointless, when you label something you normally tell what it is, instead of what it's not.

cheald 16y ago
"NoSQL" is generally understood to mean "Not Only SQL", not "SQL is evil, begone foul beast".
- ergo98 16y ago
  >"NoSQL" is generally understood to mean "Not Only SQL" I think that that is a bit of convenient revisionism as it becomes clear that the Emperor is wearing no clothes. There absolutely was a very antagonistic, "this changes EVERYTHING" philosophy behind the movement called NoSQL, and the name is not accidental. Perhaps it was just a bit of trolling to get attention, but in no way was it a live and let live initiative (data tactics that are now bound in "NoSQL" long existed in computer science, since before the days of SQL. They just didn't feel the need to make it a comfortable community of evangelists). It was a "that was yesterday and this is today". Of course things have changed. A bit of realism entered the mindset, so now it's more of a "Heh heh...no bad blood right? We're all good, eh?"
  - mathias_10gen 16y ago
    Actually the name was very much accidental. Read this post by the guy who coined the term: http://blog.sym-link.com/2009/10/30/nosql_whats_in_a_name.html http://blog.sym-link.com/2009/10/30/nosql_whats_in_a_name.ht... "it was one of 3 or 4 suggestions that I spouted off in the span of like 45 seconds, without thinking."
    - ergo98 16y ago
      >Actually the name was very much accidental. Spur of the moment isn't really accidental, any more than Mel Gibson accidentally said the N-word. There's a bit of a history and a thought process that leads to such a decision.
- mistermann 16y ago
  I disagree that this is the "general understanding".of the term No SQL.
- sbov 16y ago
  That would be NOSQL, not NoSQL

5 ms·

Very good article, I myself have found the "NoSQL" label pointless, when you label something you normally tell what it is, instead of what it's not.

by DjDarkman 16y ago

cheald 16y ago
"NoSQL" is generally understood to mean "Not Only SQL", not "SQL is evil, begone foul beast".
- ergo98 16y ago
  >"NoSQL" is generally understood to mean "Not Only SQL" I think that that is a bit of convenient revisionism as it becomes clear that the Emperor is wearing no clothes. There absolutely was a very antagonistic, "this changes EVERYTHING" philosophy behind the movement called NoSQL, and the name is not accidental. Perhaps it was just a bit of trolling to get attention, but in no way was it a live and let live initiative (data tactics that are now bound in "NoSQL" long existed in computer science, since before the days of SQL. They just didn't feel the need to make it a comfortable community of evangelists). It was a "that was yesterday and this is today". Of course things have changed. A bit of realism entered the mindset, so now it's more of a "Heh heh...no bad blood right? We're all good, eh?"
  - mathias_10gen 16y ago
    Actually the name was very much accidental. Read this post by the guy who coined the term: http://blog.sym-link.com/2009/10/30/nosql_whats_in_a_name.html http://blog.sym-link.com/2009/10/30/nosql_whats_in_a_name.ht... "it was one of 3 or 4 suggestions that I spouted off in the span of like 45 seconds, without thinking."
    - ergo98 16y ago
      >Actually the name was very much accidental. Spur of the moment isn't really accidental, any more than Mel Gibson accidentally said the N-word. There's a bit of a history and a thought process that leads to such a decision.
- mistermann 16y ago
  I disagree that this is the "general understanding".of the term No SQL.
- sbov 16y ago
  That would be NOSQL, not NoSQL