Prev: uw-p and make-thread
Next: Hi for those who loves fashion.. check this out :)
From: ccc31807 on 3 Mar 2010 15:54
On Mar 3, 12:36 pm, Xah Lee <xah...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> recently i wrote a blog article on The NoSQL Movement
> athttp://xahlee.org/comp/nosql.html
>
> i'd like to post it somewhere public to solicit opinions, but in the
> 20 min or so, i couldn't find a proper newsgroup, nor private list
> that my somewhat anti-NoSQL Movement article is fitting.

I only read the first two paragraphs of your article, so I can't
respond to it.

I've halfway followed the NoSQL movement. My day job is a database
manager and I so SQL databases for a living, as well as Perl. I see a
lot of abuse of relational databases in the Real World, as well as a
lot of abuse for non-SQL alternatives, e.g., (mis)using Excel for a
database. The big, enterprise database we have at work is built on IBM
UniQuery, which is a non-SQL flat file database product, so I've had a
lot of experience with big non-SQL database work.

I've also developed a marked preference for plain text databases. For
a lot of applications they are simpler, easier, and better. I've also
had some experience with XML databases, and find that they are ideal
for applications with 'ragged' data.

As with anything else, you need to match the tool to the job. Yes, I
feel that relational database technology has been much used, and much
abused. However, one of my favorite applications is Postgres, and I
think it's absolutely unbeatable where you have to store data and
perform a large number of queries.

Finally, with regard to Structured Query Language itself, I find that
it's well suited to its purpose. I hand write a lot of SQL statements
for various purposes, and while like any language you find it
exceedingly difficult to express concepts that you can think, it
mostly allows the expression of most of what you want to say.

CC.
From: toby on 3 Mar 2010 16:55
On Mar 3, 3:54 pm, ccc31807 <carte...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mar 3, 12:36 pm, Xah Lee <xah...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > recently i wrote a blog article on The NoSQL Movement
> > athttp://xahlee.org/comp/nosql.html
>
> > i'd like to post it somewhere public to solicit opinions, but in the
> > 20 min or so, i couldn't find a proper newsgroup, nor private list
> > that my somewhat anti-NoSQL Movement article is fitting.
>
> I only read the first two paragraphs of your article, so I can't
> respond to it.
>
> I've halfway followed the NoSQL movement. My day job is a database
> manager and I so SQL databases for a living, as well as Perl. I see a
> lot of abuse of relational databases in the Real World, as well as a
> lot of abuse for non-SQL alternatives, e.g., (mis)using Excel for a
> database. The big, enterprise database we have at work is built on IBM
> UniQuery, which is a non-SQL flat file database product, so I've had a
> lot of experience with big non-SQL database work.
>
> I've also developed a marked preference for plain text databases. For
> a lot of applications they are simpler, easier, and better. I've also
> had some experience with XML databases, and find that they are ideal
> for applications with 'ragged' data.
>
> As with anything else, you need to match the tool to the job. Yes, I
> feel that relational database technology has been much used, and much
> abused. However, one of my favorite applications is Postgres, and I
> think it's absolutely unbeatable

It is beatable outside of its sweetspot, like any system. NoSQL is not
so much about "beating" relational databases, as simply a blanket term
for useful non-relational technologies. There's not much point in
reading Xah beyond the heading of his manifesto, as it is no more
relevant to be "anti-NoSQL" as to be "anti-integers" because they
don't store fractions.

> where you have to store data and

"relational data"

> perform a large number of queries.

Why does the number matter?

>
> Finally, with regard to Structured Query Language itself, I find that
> it's well suited to its purpose. I hand write a lot of SQL statements
> for various purposes, and while like any language you find it
> exceedingly difficult to express concepts that you can think, it
> mostly allows the expression of most of what you want to say.
>
> CC.

From: Captain Obvious on 3 Mar 2010 17:11
XL> recently i wrote a blog article on The NoSQL Movement
XL> at http://xahlee.org/comp/nosql.html

What is your experience with SQL/NoSQL?

Note that NoSQL is mostly about scalability, that is, dealing with large
data sets, lots of queries per seconds.
What is your experience in this area?

From: ccc31807 on 4 Mar 2010 09:21
On Mar 3, 4:55 pm, toby <t...(a)telegraphics.com.au> wrote:
> >  where you have to store data and
>
> "relational data"

Data is neither relational nor unrelational. Data is data.
Relationships are an artifact, something we impose on the data.
Relations are for human convenience, not something inherent in the
data itself.

> > perform a large number of queries.
>
> Why does the number matter?

Have you ever had to make a large number of queries to an XML
database? In some ways, an XML database is the counterpart to a
relational database in that the data descriptions constitute the
relations. However, since the search is to the XML elements, and you
can't construct indicies for XML databases in the same way you can
with relational databases, a large search can take much longer that
you might expect.

CC.
From: Juan Pedro Bolivar Puente on 4 Mar 2010 11:51
On 04/03/10 16:21, ccc31807 wrote:
> On Mar 3, 4:55 pm, toby <t...(a)telegraphics.com.au> wrote:
>>> where you have to store data and
>>
>> "relational data"
>
> Data is neither relational nor unrelational. Data is data.
> Relationships are an artifact, something we impose on the data.
> Relations are for human convenience, not something inherent in the
> data itself.
>

No, relations are data. "Data is data" says nothing. Data is
information. Actually, all data are relations: relating /values/ to
/properties/ of /entities/. Relations as understood by the "relational
model" is nothing else but assuming that properties and entities are
first class values of the data system and the can also be related.

JP
 |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3
Prev: uw-p and make-thread
Next: Hi for those who loves fashion.. check this out :)