4 ms·
Take away is this has less to do with technical reasons and most to do with licensing, which is fair. The other takeaway is the fact that they saw huge gains s
by endisneigh 3y ago
Take away is this has less to do with technical reasons and most to do with licensing, which is fair.
The other takeaway is the fact that they saw huge gains switching as a result of query optimizations with joins shows that they’re data wasn’t properly modeled for use with a key value store, which probably added to them switching to the right type of store to begin with.
- ako 3y agoAnd that’s the core problem with key value stores, your data needs usually grow beyond key value scenarios. In the beginning it might fit, but then you add more pages with different needs, reporting/dashboards with different needs, APIs with different needs, and ETL processes with different needs. Trying to force everything into key value is short term thinking.
- endisneigh 3y agoWhat you’re describing isn’t an inherent problem with a key value store. Forcing everything to OLTP SQL is also short term thinking. Pick the right tool for the job. It’s funny you mention growth as the limiting factor for key value stores, if anything that’s the one area where they’re objectively superior. Which is why most search databases and caches are key value stores.
- ako 3y agoNot if you use a rdbms to store your key/values. Then you can do arbitrary queries with joins over multiple tables, add views, stored procedures, etc.
- endisneigh 3y agoSure, but that’s not related to what you said prior. Again, right tool for the job.
- ako 3y agoSure. I meant grow in number of ways you use your data, not in volume of data.
- endisneigh 3y agoWhat you meant was understood and my point stands