Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Is It Time For NoSQL 2.0?

Posted by Unknown on from the hyperhack-the-hypergibsoncube dept.

New submitter rescrv writes "Key-value stores (like Cassandra, Redis and DynamoDB) have been replacing traditional databases in many demanding web applications (e.g. Twitter, Google, Facebook, LinkedIn, and others). But for the most part, the differences between existing NoSQL systems come down to the choice of well-studied implementation techniques; in particular, they all provide a similar API that achieves high performance and scalability by limiting applications to simple operations like GET and PUT. HyperDex, a new key-value store developed at Cornell, stands out in the NoSQL spectrum with its unique design. HyperDex employs a unique multi-dimensional hash function to enable efficient search operations — that is, objects may be retrieved without using the key (PDF) under which they are stored. Other systems employ indexing techniques to enable search, or enumerate all objects in the system. In contrast, HyperDex's design enables applications to retrieve search results directly from servers in the system. The results are impressive. Preliminary benchmark results on the project website show that HyperDex provides significant performance improvements over Cassandra and MongoDB. With its unique design, and impressive performance, it seems fittng to ask: Is HyperDex the start of NoSQL 2.0?"

11 of 164 comments (clear)

  1. No SQL, Know SQL by PortHaven · · Score: 1, Funny

    Er...

    Um...

    Yeah...

  2. wake me in a few years by joss · · Score: 5, Funny

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=URJeuxI7kHo

    is the best introduction to this subject I've seen. Until someone can explain the pros of hyperdex with a funny video featuring cute animals I'm sticking with technology that's been tested more thoroughly.

    --
    http://rareformnewmedia.com/
  3. Wow! That's some neat Progress! by VortexCortex · · Score: 5, Funny

    The hashing system is pretty neat. The idea that you could get at records without their specific key via search criterion is astounding.

    In the future more advanced hashing systems will allow NoSQL databases to extract a set of records all containing a similar subset of data without keys at all!

    Of course we'd need a name for the sections that are matching. Perhaps "Columns", yeah, then each result returned could be called a "Row", makes sense. I bet you could then create even more complex matching patterns for multiple "Columns" against each record in the data-set. If only there was a language to describe query we're sending to the servers... Oh! Server Query Language!

    I can't wait to use SQL with NoSQL 3.0!

    1. Re:Wow! That's some neat Progress! by binary+paladin · · Score: 3, Funny

      Another brilliant post on Slashdot!

      The quality of responses around here improve every day.

  4. Re:Why not both? by w_dragon · · Score: 5, Funny

    Thank you for a concise summary of the difference between the 2 systems. I must say though that such informative and level-headed comparisons have no place in a slashdot discussion ;)

  5. Re:NoSQL 2.0 by Sez+Zero · · Score: 4, Funny

    Yeah, all the hipsters will be calling it "No2SQL", which is way more righteous.

  6. Re:Why not both? by justforgetme · · Score: 5, Funny

    (speed (in some cases), scalability, and flexibility) and disadvantages (speed (in some cases), lack of consistency, less restriction on bad programming).

    You have a background in Lisp right?

    --
    -- no sig today
  7. Re:Why not both? by Sarten-X · · Score: 4, Funny

    (not (know (I) (meaning (you))))

    --
    You do not have a moral or legal right to do absolutely anything you want.
  8. Re:Why not both? by shentino · · Score: 4, Funny

    Yeth

  9. Re:Only 2.0? by kangsterizer · · Score: 3, Funny

    Or NoSQL 16 if that was Google. What a great joke.

  10. Re:Why not both? by lysdexia · · Score: 5, Funny

    I concur! Shocking really. Gentlemen! Seize that miscreant's pants!