Red Hat Satellite to standardize on PostgreSQL backend

Re:Red Hat Satellite to standardize on PostgreSQL backend by staticassertion on Thursday February 14, 2019 @12:45AM (#19159870)

Do you think all of the companies that chose Cassandra and Dynamo were wrong to do so? There's no use case for NoSQL? There were no lessons learned, value adds from NoSQL?

How do you explain the 'NewSQL' approach, which seems to be so clearly borne of what we've learned from NoSQL?

It should be obvious that NoSQL has value, regardless of the issues with one of the earlier NoSQL DBs.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Red Hat Satellite to standardize on PostgreSQL backend by pjmlp on Thursday February 14, 2019 @12:59AM (#19159917)

I don't see a value other than fashion driven development, specially when comparing the bare bones browser GUI for Dynamo with something like SQL Server Management Studio or that whole story with primary and secondary indexes, with prices being set by index usage.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Red Hat Satellite to standardize on PostgreSQL backend by menacingly on Thursday February 14, 2019 @02:18AM (#19160225)

The Cassandra design was always a bit of a frankenstein without clear upside to me, but the nosql craze started great conversations.

There is certainly merit beyond fashion to the dynamo architecture, and there are workloads where (for example) HBase is simply the correct type of tool despite the lack of polish of its management interface

[ Parent | on HN ]