Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Making Sense of the NoSQL Standouts

Posted by timothy on from the matching-this-to-this-to-this dept.

snydeq writes "InfoWorld's Peter Wayner provides an overview of the more compelling NoSQL data stores on offer today in hopes of helping IT pros get started experimenting with these powerful tools. From Cassandra, to MongoDB, to Neo4J, each appears geared for a particular set of application types, providing DBAs with a wealth of opportunity for experimentation, and a measure of confusion in finding the right tool for their environment. 'There are great advantages to this Babelization if the needs of your project fit the abilities of one of the new databases. If they line up well, the performance boosts can be incredible because the project developers aren't striving to build one Dreadnought to solve every problem,' Wayner writes. 'The experimentation is also fun because the designers don't feel compelled to make sure their data store is a drop-in replacement that speaks SQL like a native.'"

2 of 152 comments (clear)

  1. not worth reading by rla3rd · · Score: 5, Informative

    Don' t bother reading this fluff. Wikipedia offers a better overview. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NoSQL. Oh I forgot, this is slashdot, no one here reads the articles :).

  2. Re:NoSQL is garbage, plain and simple. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    If you view it as a SQL replacement, then yes, utter garbage. But if you take it for what it is, then no.

    The problem is there is a fad surrounding NoSQL and young, ignorant, inexperienced developers think RDBMs are for old farts who refuse to get with the times rather than viewing it as a different tool for solving a different problem. If you want/need ACID properties, you go with SQL. If you don't, NoSQL may be appropriate.