Mike Hogan (CEO ScaleDB) provides some very valid issues with traditional relational databases operating as Databases-as-a-Service:
When moving from a self-managed database—either in the cloud or on premise—to a DaaS, the “DBA-in-the-cloud” doesn’t have that visibility into the business requirements, performance requirements, development schedule, and more. This lack of visibility turns the already challenging task of hand-tuning the database into a near impossibility using traditional databases.
And these are just the most visible ones.
On the other hand, I totally agree with Markus ‘maol’ Perdrizat pointing out that NewSQL is not the only solution to these problems:
I agree with the problem positioning, but feel strongly that NewSQL is not a requirement to address the problem here, you can equally work a little services layer and put all the control into the hands of the user, essentially replacing (a lot of) the DBA tasks with automation and APIs.
What NewSQL gives you though, and we see that with Xeround and supposedly also ScaleDB, is the elasticity and transparent sharding that’s difficult to achieve with the more traditional Oracle, Sybase or SQL Server databases that are still often required in the enterprise space.
Original title and link: Traditional SQL DaaS vs NewSQL ( ©myNoSQL)