Click here to monitor SSC
SQLServerCentral is supported by Red Gate Software Ltd.
 
Log in  ::  Register  ::  Not logged in
 
 
 
        
Home       Members    Calendar    Who's On


Add to briefcase

One Database to Rule Them All Expand / Collapse
Author
Message
Posted Wednesday, April 16, 2014 8:43 PM


SSC-Dedicated

SSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-Dedicated

Group: Administrators
Last Login: Yesterday @ 8:53 PM
Points: 33,204, Visits: 15,353
Comments posted to this topic are about the item One Database to Rule Them All






Follow me on Twitter: @way0utwest

Forum Etiquette: How to post data/code on a forum to get the best help
Post #1562508
Posted Thursday, April 17, 2014 1:57 AM
SSCrazy

SSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazy

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Wednesday, August 27, 2014 1:07 AM
Points: 2,901, Visits: 1,805
It's worth reading Nathan Marz's book Big Data. It's an easy read but as a MEAP there are a few glaring typos.

It goes into the Lamda architecture in depth and the though processes underpinning it.

The message is that it is not just the tech underpinning what Twitter do it is the manner in which they use it.

As the blog posts suggest, they are trying to solve old problems by coming up with new blends of existing solutions. What they are doing goes far beyond what SQL Server can do and yet the "One DB to rule them all" approach really is where SQL Server has been moving

  • Traditional Relational engine

  • Column store engine

  • Filestream

  • Hekaton engine

  • XML processing - Hopefully they will add JSON to this

  • Analysis services engine

  • Data reader destinations in SSIS

  • Data dependent routing



LinkedIn Profile
Newbie on www.simple-talk.com
Post #1562543
Posted Thursday, April 17, 2014 10:35 AM
Grasshopper

GrasshopperGrasshopperGrasshopperGrasshopperGrasshopperGrasshopperGrasshopperGrasshopper

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Wednesday, August 27, 2014 2:58 PM
Points: 21, Visits: 256
I took an interesting one-day course from DataStax on Apache Cassandra - a big data solution used by Netflix, Comcast, eBay, and dozens of other companies.

Like what Twitter uses, it's designed to be easily scaled horizontally, and provides great performance, but with data-duplication and at the cost of consistency; you get eventual consistency, which is fine for social media, but not so hot for banks or financial institutions.

DataStax sells a commercial version (support, extra tools), so I was expecting some bias, but what struck me as amusing (and a little over the top) was the presenter calling RDBMSs "legacy" all day long.

Cobol is a legacy language - it's been superseded by languages that can do everything Cobol can do, and more.

Cassandra, and other big databases, can't do everything that SQL Server, Oracle, MySQL, etc, can do. In fact, big-data databases are kind of crappy at a lot of what an RDBMS can do with ease. I am confident Netflix doesn't use Cassandra as their billing database, for example. But maybe they use Cassandra to see if there is a correlation between the movies and tv-shows you watch and your credit card of choice.

Fortunately, both solutions play well with each other, just as an OLTP system integrates well with a data warehouse.
Post #1562764
Posted Thursday, April 17, 2014 11:51 AM
SSCrazy

SSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazy

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Wednesday, August 27, 2014 1:07 AM
Points: 2,901, Visits: 1,805
but what struck me as amusing (and a little over the top) was the presenter calling RDBMSs "legacy" all day long.


I've found that the techy types at the NOSQL vendors are usually pretty honest about what their use case and what doesn't fit their use case.

The marketing types are another matter entirely. One marketing type extolled the virtues of their distro of Hadoop stating that they could ingest 500GB in half an hour and that was way beyond the capabilities of traditional RDBMS. Clearly they hadn't seen the Microsoft article on loading 1TB in 30 minutes.

One of the SQLCat labs at SQL Bits (Liverpool) actually went into the details of how this was done and it was remarkably straight forward.

Of course the Hadoop marketeer didn't give details of what that 500GB looked like. Was it a simple log file or a complex structured JSON document. we'll never know!

Then there is the irritating tendency to demonstrate the NOSQL products superiority by using an awful schema in an RDBMS to say that the RDBMS can't cope. That's like saying that if you make Usain Bolt wear diving boots it prooves he's a lousy sprinter.


LinkedIn Profile
Newbie on www.simple-talk.com
Post #1562802
Posted Thursday, April 17, 2014 12:08 PM


SSCommitted

SSCommittedSSCommittedSSCommittedSSCommittedSSCommittedSSCommittedSSCommittedSSCommitted

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Friday, August 29, 2014 4:17 PM
Points: 1,651, Visits: 4,709
NoSQL databases are the digital equivalent of a basement level archive with pallets full of boxes more or less organized. They typically can't function as a primary database of record or even an operational data store. It's the transactional or meta-data layer that "rules" all the other disparate data stores. For example, on the Hadoop platform, HCatalog, the meta-data layer that maps files to logical tables names, must be a relational database like MySQL or SQL Server.
Post #1562809
Posted Tuesday, April 22, 2014 4:17 AM


SSCertifiable

SSCertifiableSSCertifiableSSCertifiableSSCertifiableSSCertifiableSSCertifiableSSCertifiableSSCertifiableSSCertifiable

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Today @ 8:37 AM
Points: 5,343, Visits: 3,045
Maybe NoSQL databases are more like the tourism leaflet stands. Quick to access. No guaranteed order. Exceptionally good at that task i.e. it is no filing cabinet!!!

Gaz

-- Stop your grinnin' and drop your linen...they're everywhere!!!
Post #1563744
Posted Thursday, April 24, 2014 11:12 AM
SSCrazy

SSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazy

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Wednesday, August 27, 2014 1:07 AM
Points: 2,901, Visits: 1,805
Unsupervised digital landfill

LinkedIn Profile
Newbie on www.simple-talk.com
Post #1564792
Posted Thursday, April 24, 2014 11:33 AM


SSCommitted

SSCommittedSSCommittedSSCommittedSSCommittedSSCommittedSSCommittedSSCommittedSSCommitted

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Friday, August 29, 2014 4:17 PM
Points: 1,651, Visits: 4,709
David.Poole (4/24/2014)
Unsupervised digital landfill

Unfortunately there are many IT shops who treat their relational database like a digital landfill: no thought for normalization, constraints, or optimization. Archived emails, website clicks, basically anything consisting of 0s and 1s, gets dumped into the landfill that gets so large it needs it own zip code.

When the database starts crashing, they ask themselves:
"Do we need a bigger dump truck for all this?"
Post #1564798
« Prev Topic | Next Topic »

Add to briefcase

Permissions Expand / Collapse