On Sun, Feb 13 2011, Santosh Rajan wrote: > Google has BigTable as its nosql implementation. You would think that, > for a mission critical massive scale operation like Google adwords, > Google uses BigTable right? Wrong! They use MySQL. > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AdWords#Technology > > Google see's so much value with what works, that in fact they submit > patches to MySQL, for any large scale problem they faced. > > Understanding that your job is "to get the job done", and new fangled > stuff is simply not worth the risk, when postgresql or MySQL can get > the job done, will take you a long way towards database zen.
RDBMS and document stores optimise for different things[1]. This diagram shows where these different systems fall http://guide.couchdb.org/editions/1/en/consistency.html#cap Shoehorning an application that would best work with an RDMBS (and all the things that it offers) to work with a document store is folly. It's equally dumb to force something that's a natural fit for a document store to use an RDMBS. Google used mySQL for adwords because they needed what it offered. They use BigTable for a number of other products because it's a better fit over there http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BigTable#History I'm new to the whole NoSQL thing but it offers new ideas and I think dismissing them as "new fangled stuff" that's "not worth the risk" is myopic. [...] Footnotes: [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CAP_theorem -- _______________________________________________ BangPypers mailing list BangPypers@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/bangpypers
