Most data isn’t “big,” and businesses are wasting money pretending it is

Re:Most data isn’t “big,” and businesses are wasting money p... by vasyainv on Monday May 13, 2013 @08:15AM (#5698231)

Perhaps, but can't you just organize your objects by having a table for each type and adding a column as needed? it doesn't sound like such a big deal

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Most data isn’t “big,” and businesses are wasting money p... by raverbashing on Monday May 13, 2013 @08:50AM (#5698337)

Looks like fun

But why would I waste developer time doing that if I can only do db.table.insert(obj) - in MongoDB for example (obj is a JS object)

Also, finding all objects with a field named 'field1' and value '3' is slower if you do that in a relational DB (and that's the simplest case)

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Most data isn’t “big,” and businesses are wasting money p... by mayank on Monday May 13, 2013 @01:48PM (#5700165)

Why on earth would that be slower in a relational db? That makes no sense, since indices in both nosql and relational dbs are variants of b-trees.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Most data isn’t “big,” and businesses are wasting money p... by raverbashing on Monday May 13, 2013 @02:41PM (#5700564)

Well, it's slower because of a join that exists in SQL (the relationship between your 'field/value' table and the entry. Apart from that, as you said indexes are similar.

The fun thing about NoSQL skeptics is how they think of only the current scenarios they work with, and they won't believe you until they get burned by it. So be it.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Most data isn’t “big,” and businesses are wasting money p... by vasyainv on Monday May 13, 2013 @02:21PM (#5700431)

Well, because presumably SQL databases have features you don't get with noqsl solutions.

[ Parent | on HN ]