NoSQL is sticky because people have been misusing SQL databases for things that they are bad at for years. Now people are doing things right, and it feels better.
All the people that show up to NoSQL articles and say, "you should always use SQL" are the ones that happened to use relational databases for the right tasks.
I wish there was a delay between when screws were invented and when screwdrivers were invented so that we could have seen the NoHammer movement. Of course you shouldn't screw in screws with a hammer. But hammers handle nails pretty well.
Well, there is also the widespread belief that "if MySQL doesn't do it, it's impossible for any RDBMS to". When people say "scalability" or "sharding" for instance, this is what they're complaining about.
Every single database sharding project I've seen has been a gigantic pile of workarounds and insanity, even if/when people got it to function properly.
How about "if MySQL doesn't do it, then much more expensive databases might do it poorly after a whole bunch of effort"
Comments
NoSQL is sticky because people have been misusing SQL databases for things that they are bad at for years. Now people are doing things right, and it feels better.
All the people that show up to NoSQL articles and say, "you should always use SQL" are the ones that happened to use relational databases for the right tasks.
I wish there was a delay between when screws were invented and when screwdrivers were invented so that we could have seen the NoHammer movement. Of course you shouldn't screw in screws with a hammer. But hammers handle nails pretty well.
Well, there is also the widespread belief that "if MySQL doesn't do it, it's impossible for any RDBMS to". When people say "scalability" or "sharding" for instance, this is what they're complaining about.
Every single database sharding project I've seen has been a gigantic pile of workarounds and insanity, even if/when people got it to function properly.
How about "if MySQL doesn't do it, then much more expensive databases might do it poorly after a whole bunch of effort"
How about "buying native support for partitioning and hash joins is cheaper than hacking it up in MySQL"?
I regularly work on DBs of 10s of teras with NO sharding or any of that nonsense.
How much does that cost? How does it compare to 40k for 10 commodity servers at 4k each and no license fees?
I read that complaint as being about cost-effectiveness rather than strictly possibility.
Yeah, it's too bad there aren't any free RDBMSs besides MySQL.
That support replication? Just for starters.
Yeah, there are, but hey, I'll make comparisons to MySQL 3 and 4 now.
Thanks, exactly :)