ALL COVERED TOPICS

NoSQL Benchmarks NoSQL use cases NoSQL Videos NoSQL Hybrid Solutions NoSQL Presentations Big Data Hadoop MapReduce Pig Hive Flume Oozie Sqoop HDFS ZooKeeper Cascading Cascalog BigTable Cassandra HBase Hypertable Couchbase CouchDB MongoDB OrientDB RavenDB Jackrabbit Terrastore Amazon DynamoDB Redis Riak Project Voldemort Tokyo Cabinet Kyoto Cabinet memcached Amazon SimpleDB Datomic MemcacheDB M/DB GT.M Amazon Dynamo Dynomite Mnesia Yahoo! PNUTS/Sherpa Neo4j InfoGrid Sones GraphDB InfiniteGraph AllegroGraph MarkLogic Clustrix CouchDB Case Studies MongoDB Case Studies NoSQL at Adobe NoSQL at Facebook NoSQL at Twitter

NAVIGATE MAIN CATEGORIES

Close

Too Much Redis?

Ben Curtis ☞ thinks that using Redis for managing friends list as described in the ☞ EngineYard post is overly complicated:

Yesterday I read a post over at the EngineYard blog about a use case for Redis (in the name of being a polyglot, trying new things, etc.), and I just had to scratch my head. I love Redis — it rocks my world — but that example was too much for me. If you just want to store a set of ids somewhere to avoid normalization headaches, introducing Redis is overkill… just do it in MySQL!

He goes on and proposes a MySQL solution in which friends IDs are serialized as a comma separated list. Frankly speaking, I do see quite a few advantages Redis has compared to this one:

  1. Redis knows how to handle sets
    1. you don’t have to deal with de-duplication
    2. (most probably) the storage is optimized
  2. with manual serialization you’ll have to deal with all concurrency issues occurring when updating these lists

So what is the advantage of Ben’s suggested solution?

Original title and link for this post: Too Much Redis? (published on the NoSQL blog: myNoSQL)