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

One Database to Rule Them All?

Curt Monash took upon himself the task of writing about why a data store independent of consistency models, upfront data modeling and access algorithms is almost impossible:

To date, nobody has ever discovered a data layout that is efficient for all usage patterns.

He’s reached a similar conclusion to what I wrote in my link post. Here’s mine:

[…] a database feature an ubiquitous interface independent of consistency models, upfront data modeling, and access algorithms is never going to be efficient. Actually, I’m not even sure it would make sense being built

Here’s Curt Monash’s:

So what would happen if somebody tried to bundle all conceivable functionality into a single DBMS, with a plan to optimize the layout of any particular part of the database as appropriate? I think the outcome would be tears — for the development effort would be huge, while the benefits would be scanty. The most optimistic cost estimates could run in the 100s of millions of dollars, with more realistic ones adding a further order of magnitude. But no matter what the investment, the architects would be on the horns of nasty dilemma

Definitely more impactful.

Original title and link: One Database to Rule Them All? (NoSQL database©myNoSQL)

via: http://www.dbms2.com/2013/02/21/one-database-to-rule-them-all/