3 ms·
I'm less sure about this. One advantage of NoSQL is that the serverless offerings blow away any SQL DB-as-a-service offering that I've seen. I think that's beca
by solidasparagus 6y ago
I'm less sure about this. One advantage of NoSQL is that the serverless offerings blow away any SQL DB-as-a-service offering that I've seen. I think that's because NoSQL databases give you minimal, but easy-to-reason-about scaling properties whereas SQL databases do more for you, but at the cost of greatly increased complexity. I think pretty highly of AWS Aurora Serverless and the UX is still garbage in comparison to S3 or DynamoDB.
Now if you start trying to add transactions to a key-value store based architecture, NoSQL gets pretty ugly, but that's misusing the tool IMO.
Most of my projects still rely on NoSQL DBs (usually S3) because they have really excellent UX and I have plenty of data where I don't need relational properties.
- remus 6y agoFrankly it sounds like you just don't need a relational database. Their whole selling point is the strong guarantees they provide about your data, and if you aren't using those then you're basically just writing files to disk in a very convoluted way.
- solidasparagus 6y agoYou're absolutely right, I don't need a relational database. There are many use cases that don't need relations and avoiding the complexity introduced by RDBMS features I don't need is where NoSQL shines.
- valzam 6y agoI think when most people say NoSQL they don't mean S3 (even though it is like a database). In general I think - S3 - Redis/Memcached - Elasticsearch aren't really NoSQL databases in the Marketing sense since they fulfil such a specific purpose.