5 ms·

reality is 99% of companies out there will be just fine with a single db server all this nosql fad is simply because SQL is hard and newbies would just rather

reality is 99% of companies out there will be just fine with a single db server all this nosql fad is simply because SQL is hard and newbies would just rather call it old and slow because they can't be bothered to learn it

nine_k 6y ago
A single DB server is a SPOF. You normally need a hot standby if you care about availability. You can also replicate transactions to read-only copies to alleviate the read load. What most companies can do well with is a single master DB which handles updates. (Some companies can't, though; e.g. GrubHub switched to Cassandra because no monolithic RDBMS could handle the write load.)
- ConnorLeet 6y ago
  How many op/s was that? Bytes/s? Just curious because I was involved in migrating a write-heavy service off of C* to SQL Server. Our writes have higher latency now, but using managed SQL is worth it. (much cheaper too)
mulmen 6y ago
SQL is easy. Data is hard.
- sam_dusk 6y ago
  SQL queries that can beat NoSQL are easy but you still have to think about schema. Which you can just not do in K/V(you just need the key) or NoSQL. As such it makes starting really easy which is the allure. Many seem to hope they can avoid doing schemas and well architected data. Or push it in to the future. The rude awakening comes when you do need to run complex queries (and you do not have SQL or joins at all). Or when the people do not understand they have to take care about data integrity in app layer now. At the end people going for NoSQL have a much harder to manage system without the tools (like SQL, schemas, constraints) I think NoSQL is great for very specific purposes. Caches, keeping state, logging stuff. For many things it is misused and postgre with jsonb can do everything you need (faster, easier) without rude awakenings.
AtlasBarfed 6y ago
Your single server is a CA service. If you want CP or AP, then you need a "fad" database.
- deleuze 6y ago
  single server sql databases are not "CA" it doesn't make sense to talk about cap theorem like this.
- yelloweyes 6y ago
  I don't mean to say some companies like Google don't need NoSQL. Obviously they do. Also, no you don't. It's possible to have distributed RDBMS.
Akronymus 6y ago
I personally enjoy writing SQL as a novice programmer. The basics are easy. Getting to know all the intricacies of what executes how fast and such is HARD. Also: Designing a system that is prepared for unknown unknowns is practically impossible. Initial design is not too bad, but the continuous adjustments kinda suck.

nine_k 6y ago

A single DB server is a SPOF. You normally need a hot standby if you care about availability. You can also replicate transactions to read-only copies to alleviate the read load. What most companies can do well with is a single master DB which handles updates. (Some companies can't, though; e.g. GrubHub switched to Cassandra because no monolithic RDBMS could handle the write load.)

ConnorLeet 6y ago
How many op/s was that? Bytes/s? Just curious because I was involved in migrating a write-heavy service off of C* to SQL Server. Our writes have higher latency now, but using managed SQL is worth it. (much cheaper too)

mulmen 6y ago

SQL is easy. Data is hard.

sam_dusk 6y ago
SQL queries that can beat NoSQL are easy but you still have to think about schema. Which you can just not do in K/V(you just need the key) or NoSQL. As such it makes starting really easy which is the allure. Many seem to hope they can avoid doing schemas and well architected data. Or push it in to the future. The rude awakening comes when you do need to run complex queries (and you do not have SQL or joins at all). Or when the people do not understand they have to take care about data integrity in app layer now. At the end people going for NoSQL have a much harder to manage system without the tools (like SQL, schemas, constraints) I think NoSQL is great for very specific purposes. Caches, keeping state, logging stuff. For many things it is misused and postgre with jsonb can do everything you need (faster, easier) without rude awakenings.

AtlasBarfed 6y ago

Your single server is a CA service. If you want CP or AP, then you need a "fad" database.

deleuze 6y ago
single server sql databases are not "CA" it doesn't make sense to talk about cap theorem like this.
yelloweyes 6y ago
I don't mean to say some companies like Google don't need NoSQL. Obviously they do. Also, no you don't. It's possible to have distributed RDBMS.

Akronymus 6y ago

I personally enjoy writing SQL as a novice programmer. The basics are easy. Getting to know all the intricacies of what executes how fast and such is HARD. Also: Designing a system that is prepared for unknown unknowns is practically impossible. Initial design is not too bad, but the continuous adjustments kinda suck.