3 ms·
There are so many things wrong with the last sentence of this article: > "Is anybody actually handling data big enough to merit a change to NoSQL architectures
by temuze 12y ago
There are so many things wrong with the last sentence of this article:
> "Is anybody actually handling data big enough to merit a change to NoSQL architectures?"
1) NoSQL doesn't necessarily mean it automatically scales well. It means what its name implies - storing data in a non-relational database. There are plenty of crappy NoSQL databases out there.
2) You can scale relational databases really freaking well if you know what you're doing. Scalability and "big data" is more about how you use your tools than choosing the right tools.
- daleharvey 12y agoAnother mistake that is constantly repeated when people discuss `NoSQL` data stores. Performance / Scale is not the only reason to choose an alternative ('NoSQL') data store, they all have varying feature sets / capabilities and little or large points of interest which may be perfect or terrible depending on your use case. (Author of a datastore which most certainly performs terribly compared to the equivalent in a SQL store)
- _dark_matter_ 12y agoIt is widely accepted in the Database community that a primary reason people choose NoSQL data stores (read:Hadoop) is because it's free, compared to the costly enterprise alternatives. Just get your cluster, download the files, install, and go.
- daleharvey 12y agoSure thats another reason people may use alternative data stores. Again its not 'the' reason its one of various reasons.