Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by InclinedPlane 5439 days ago
I don't think that's true at all. I suspect that the most ardent noSQL advocates are actually considerably more versed in rdbms specifics than the average dev.
2 comments

Not really. The NoSQL movement is based on the assumption that the limitations of MySQL apply to all databases. Their ideas of what an RDBMS is are 15-20 years out of date - really.
It's more based on the assumption that the limitations of MySQL should apply to all databases.

I've worked 2 places with Oracle stored procedures. At both places, they were a giant nonperformant mess of spaghetti that could never be cleaned up because changing things == breaking things. And since all of the application logic had been written as transactional SQL with lots of joins over normalized tables, it was gridlock heaven inside the DB and adding more cores to the single machine barely even helped.

You can write bad code in any language!
Yeah but that's a total nonpoint.

Are you arguing we should all use COBOL and every other stupid-ass approach, as well?

I think he's saying that anecdotes are not necessarily the most valid form of data for making decisions.
Well, it's a subjective judgment, and the anecdotes I've seen/heard are 90% in one direction, with the other 10% coming from people who make their living dealing with PL/SQL.

Good apocryphal quote, it's impossible to convince someone of something if their job depends on it not being true.

So you're saying that, for example, google uses bigtable because they don't understand rdbmses?
Part of NoSQL is about scalability using commodity hardware and without spending tons of money on licenses. Sure Oracle can scale, but people want those features for free.
Paraphrasing Zawinski, it depends what your time is worth. Remember in business, the concepts of "cheap" and "expensive" simply don't exist. A thing is "worth the money" or "not".
I suspect that most "noSQL" advocates have a poor understanding of the difference between relational/structured data and unstructured/sparse data. Virtually all of the "noSQL" software is incapable of managing complex relational data, as far as I can tell. Why no one points this out is baffling to me.

"noSQL" is useful for for application layer - where caching and short-term storage are important; but most "noSQL" advocates I've seen seem to think that it should replace an RDBMS, when that couldn't be further from the truth. "noSQL" is useless as a structured backing store where RDBMS are used today, especially for large systems.