5 ms·

Here is the simple answer: SQL does not scale out to multiple databases easily, CloudDB does. And I know many startups where the above is not true, in fact, a

Here is the simple answer: SQL does not scale out to multiple databases easily, CloudDB does. And I know many startups where the above is not true, in fact, any successful startup hits a major bottleneck when they have to distribute MySQL. It's not a function of money, it's a function of the time and expertise to implement sharding well.

silentbicycle 18y ago
To what extent is this a problem with relational databases as a whole versus MySQL in particular? Also, is it known what problems couchdb encounters as it scales? Issues with indexing? I'm curious because JSON is a subset of Lua's primary datatype in much the same way it is Javascript's object notation - if you change surface details like braces and string quoting, it's semantically identical.
durana 18y ago
"SQL does not scale out to multiple databases easily, CloudDB does." I don't believe CouchDB currently does this any better than what people are doing with RDBMS like MySQL. Right now with CouchDB, there's no bult-in partitioning, so if you want to distribute documents across databases on multiple host systems, you use some sort of reverse proxy to distribute requests across hosts or application level database sharding. Both of these approaches are currently used by folks scaling out things like MySQL.
jawngee 18y ago
We are using couchdb on massify.com for an upcoming product. The replication is handy, but in the end you'll end up sharding in the app layer, because afaik it doesn't add anything in that regard. We are a long ways off from dealing with that though, so I honestly don't know much about it other than setting up replication which is easy as pie.
- charlesju 18y ago
  If you still have to shard with Cloud DB, then yes, Cloud DB is completely useless. But in theory, Cloud DB should be able to take care of sharding for you, and if it can, that'd make it much better than MySQL.

silentbicycle 18y ago

To what extent is this a problem with relational databases as a whole versus MySQL in particular? Also, is it known what problems couchdb encounters as it scales? Issues with indexing? I'm curious because JSON is a subset of Lua's primary datatype in much the same way it is Javascript's object notation - if you change surface details like braces and string quoting, it's semantically identical.

durana 18y ago

"SQL does not scale out to multiple databases easily, CloudDB does." I don't believe CouchDB currently does this any better than what people are doing with RDBMS like MySQL. Right now with CouchDB, there's no bult-in partitioning, so if you want to distribute documents across databases on multiple host systems, you use some sort of reverse proxy to distribute requests across hosts or application level database sharding. Both of these approaches are currently used by folks scaling out things like MySQL.

jawngee 18y ago

We are using couchdb on massify.com for an upcoming product. The replication is handy, but in the end you'll end up sharding in the app layer, because afaik it doesn't add anything in that regard. We are a long ways off from dealing with that though, so I honestly don't know much about it other than setting up replication which is easy as pie.

charlesju 18y ago
If you still have to shard with Cloud DB, then yes, Cloud DB is completely useless. But in theory, Cloud DB should be able to take care of sharding for you, and if it can, that'd make it much better than MySQL.