4 ms·

>NoSQL is almost always less powerful abstractly but easier to scale. This is no longer true. We now have second-generation NoSQL data stores that provide stro

>NoSQL is almost always less powerful abstractly but easier to scale. This is no longer true. We now have second-generation NoSQL data stores that provide strong consistency, fault-tolerance and ACID transactions, based on the sharded NoSQL architecture that scales easily.

michaelochurch 14y ago
Excellent points. Still, "powerful" is defined by client needs (especially performance) and client needs are based on 30 years of expectations derived from the relational model (even if most clients have no idea that's what they want). If you're exposed to the accretion of business requirements you do not control, you'll eventually be pushed toward a definition of "power" that relational databases meet the best... except when the dataset gets large. What you say is still true, of course, and will only become more true over time. As more work is put into technologies, they tend to become more well-rounded. Languages that used to have awful performance (100x C) are now closer to 3-5x, for one example. The best NoSQLs now have many of the traditionally relational benefits, and the best relational databases (e.g. PostgreSQL) are overcoming traditional deficits associated with "relational".
ucee054 14y ago
Just out of interest, how are your opinions on the superiority of NoSQL systems received by http://www.cs.cornell.edu/johannes/ http://www.cs.cornell.edu/johannes/ and http://www.cs.cornell.edu/annual_report/99-00/Demers.htm http://www.cs.cornell.edu/annual_report/99-00/Demers.htm ?
- emin_gun_sirer 14y ago
  All I can say is "some of my best friends have worked on RDBMSs." I don't hold it against them. ;-) More seriously: Al, Johannes, and many other notable researchers in the DB space have complex, nuanced opinions on NoSQL systems. And these opinions are being revised daily as new information comes in; we've seen some researchers go from decrying the whole NoSQL movement to becoming some of its fiercest proponents, seemingly overnight. I would do them disservice if I were to try to present them here. So I'd encourage you to ask them directly. Or perhaps we could have a panel at a conference. That'd be fun if done right.

michaelochurch 14y ago

Excellent points. Still, "powerful" is defined by client needs (especially performance) and client needs are based on 30 years of expectations derived from the relational model (even if most clients have no idea that's what they want). If you're exposed to the accretion of business requirements you do not control, you'll eventually be pushed toward a definition of "power" that relational databases meet the best... except when the dataset gets large. What you say is still true, of course, and will only become more true over time. As more work is put into technologies, they tend to become more well-rounded. Languages that used to have awful performance (100x C) are now closer to 3-5x, for one example. The best NoSQLs now have many of the traditionally relational benefits, and the best relational databases (e.g. PostgreSQL) are overcoming traditional deficits associated with "relational".

ucee054 14y ago

Just out of interest, how are your opinions on the superiority of NoSQL systems received by http://www.cs.cornell.edu/johannes/ http://www.cs.cornell.edu/johannes/ and http://www.cs.cornell.edu/annual_report/99-00/Demers.htm http://www.cs.cornell.edu/annual_report/99-00/Demers.htm ?

emin_gun_sirer 14y ago
All I can say is "some of my best friends have worked on RDBMSs." I don't hold it against them. ;-) More seriously: Al, Johannes, and many other notable researchers in the DB space have complex, nuanced opinions on NoSQL systems. And these opinions are being revised daily as new information comes in; we've seen some researchers go from decrying the whole NoSQL movement to becoming some of its fiercest proponents, seemingly overnight. I would do them disservice if I were to try to present them here. So I'd encourage you to ask them directly. Or perhaps we could have a panel at a conference. That'd be fun if done right.