Slashdot Mirror


Is the Relational Database Doomed?

DB Guy writes "There's an article over on Read Write Web about what the future of relational databases looks like when faced with new challenges to its dominance from key/value stores, such as SimpleDB, CouchDB, Project Voldemort and BigTable. The conclusion suggests that relational databases and key value stores aren't really mutually exclusive and instead are different tools for different requirements."

28 of 344 comments (clear)

  1. Uh-oh by benjymouse · · Score: 5, Funny

    Someone forgot to put a where clause on that delete.

    --
    Reading slashdot one-liner: (irm http://rss.slashdot.org/Slashdot/slashdot).rdf.item | fl title,desc*
    1. Re:Uh-oh by MarkRose · · Score: 2, Funny

      That's okay! I'll just rollback the transaction.... oh shit, that was a MyISAM table...

      --
      Be relentless!
  2. Top 25 Reasons the Relational Database is Doomed by MillionthMonkey · · Score: 5, Funny

    Someone type this up and submit it to Digg.

  3. Re:new record by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 4, Funny

    Yeaah. Only if you did not know the meaning of the '?' symbol.

    --
    When information is power, privacy is freedom.
  4. Voldemort! by GreatRedShark · · Score: 3, Funny

    There's a db called Project Voldemort? That's awesome! I'm switching to that just for the name! I think my manager is a Harry Potter fan so getting approval shouldn't be too hard.

    1. Re:Voldemort! by youthoftoday · · Score: 4, Funny

      A Harry Potter fan? Voldemort? Surely the name is the one thing that'll *prevent* approval?

      --
      -1 not first post
    2. Re:Voldemort! by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 5, Funny

      The name might be cool; but the length of some of the commands will really get to you. How many times do you want to type AVADA_KEDAVRA TABLE?

    3. Re:Voldemort! by the_B0fh · · Score: 4, Funny

      **SPOILER ALERT**

      In book 8, it turns out that good ol' Voldy is actually Harry's older brother. They had a tearful reunion, and Voldy now works for Harry.

    4. Re:Voldemort! by jollyreaper · · Score: 5, Funny

      The name might be cool; but the length of some of the commands will really get to you. How many times do you want to type AVADA_KEDAVRA TABLE?

      Better than PokemonDB. Then you have to jump on top of your desk and shout "Customer Table, I select you!" every time you run a damn query.

      --
      Kwisatz Haderach
      Sell the spice to CHOAM
      This Mahdi took Shaddam's Throne
    5. Re:Voldemort! by GreatRedShark · · Score: 5, Funny

      You're right, that is a bit cumbersome. Hopefully, they'll release a friendly GUI wizard to make working with it more efficient.

    6. Re:Voldemort! by WuphonsReach · · Score: 4, Funny

      Better than PokemonDB. Then you have to jump on top of your desk and shout "Customer Table, I select you!" every time you run a damn query.

      *polite golf clap*

      --
      Wolde you bothe eate your cake, and have your cake?
    7. Re:Voldemort! by daveime · · Score: 3, Funny

      It's already been done ...

      HAI
      CAN HAS DBASE?
      I HAZ A VARIABLE1 IS NOTHING
      IM IN YR DATA ;) "test.mdb"
              CAN I PLZ GET column1 column2 column3
              ALL UP IN table1
              OMG column1 IZ BIGGER THAN 5
              ALL UR BASE R BELONG 2 VARIABLE1
      IM OUTTA YR DATA
      VISIBLE VARIABLE1
      KTHXBYE

  5. A great open source implementation by thammoud · · Score: 5, Funny

    Map db = new HashMap();

    beginTransaction(); // Synchronize on the map
    db.add("key", "value");
    commitTransaction(); // Just serialize the fucker to a file. The idiots using this won't know the difference.

  6. In relation to what? by Penguinshit · · Score: 5, Funny

    I won't believe it until Netcraft confirms it.

  7. Re:Yeah by idontgno · · Score: 3, Funny

    Is white the new black?

    No, it isn't, black is the new black, and whiten and black are not really mutually exclusive. And.... I made you look. Thanks for the pageviews, suckers!

    --
    Welcome to the Panopticon. Used to be a prison, now it's your home.
  8. Re:Enough with the death of the relational DB by Penguinshit · · Score: 5, Funny

    Don't online dating sites use relational databases?

  9. Re:Yes, but not soon. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Sleepycat made a good key/value pair database but that isn't what we're talking about.

  10. Is the flat file doomed? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    You should have seen how quickly flat file usage flatlined when relational databases came out. I mean *nobody* uses plain text files anymore. Can you imagine not having your crontabs in a SQL DB?

  11. Re:?'s meaning - literal and implied by 117 · · Score: 5, Funny

    President Obama smokes crack?!!?!??!!?!

  12. Re:new record by julesh · · Score: 5, Funny

    that's efficient -a summary that refutes the inflammatory headline

    I'm just sayin'

    Nah. Efficient would be if the summary were "No."

  13. Re:new record by eln · · Score: 4, Funny

    Next Slashdot article: Is Jah-Wren Ryel a child molester?

    There's no evidence Jah-Wren Ryel has ever molested children, and no reason to suspect he would ever do so. Bandying about accusations like that would likely ruin his life forever.

    However, since child molestation is such a big political issue these days, as a responsible news site I believe we need to have equal representation from both sides of the argument and let our viewers decide.

  14. Re:Some credibility... by jernejk · · Score: 2, Funny

    no, really.. this is utter crap: so called benefit: "The first benefit is that they are simple and thus scale much better than today's relational databases. If you are putting together a system in-house and intend to throw dozens or hundreds of servers behind your data store to cope with what you expect will be a massive demand in scale, then consider a key/value store." but then:"Bugs in a properly designed relational database usually don't lead to data integrity issues; bugs in a key/value database, however, quite easily lead to data integrity issues." and then it just goes on on how RDBMSs are really cool... oh, I got it, it was really written by Oracle reverse marketing department!

  15. RDBMS don't scale! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Quick someone tell CCP!

  16. Yep, this will happen by ghjm · · Score: 2, Funny

    I can see the meeting now.

    Developer: "Hey boss, I found a better product for the transaction processing data! It might save us a bunch of money on Oracle licenses!"
    Boss: "Great, what is it?"
    Developer: "Project Voldemort!"
    Boss: "..."
    Developer: "No really, let me explain..."
    Boss: "I have a meeting to get to, but hey, let me know if you have any other great ideas."

  17. Re:?'s meaning - literal and implied by value_added · · Score: 4, Funny

    President Obama smokes crack?!!?!??!!?!

    Dunno. Has he stopped beating his wife?

  18. A SQL query walks into a bar... by SystematicPsycho · · Score: 4, Funny

    A SQL query walks into a bar and sees two tables. He walks up to them and says 'Can I join you?'

    From Tom Kyte's blog sql joke

    --
    Analytic & algebraic topology of locally Euclidean meterization of infinitely differentiable Riemmanian manifold
  19. Re:?'s meaning - literal and implied by sharkey · · Score: 1, Funny

    OK, but, what about the fisting?

    --

    --
    "Outlook not so good." That magic 8-ball knows everything! I'll ask about Exchange Server next.
  20. Re:Enough with the death of the relational DB by Yetihehe · · Score: 3, Funny

    They do. Object databases are only for insensitive clods.

    --
    Extreme Programming - Redundant Array of Inexpensive Developers