Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

MySQL is a Better NoSQL

engineering.wix.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 91 posts

Re: MySQL is a Better NoSQL

#11

Post by p4wnc6 »

halayli wrote: post #3

> "MongoDB, Cassandra, Redis, or Hadoop" Adding Hadoop in the mix tells me he doesn't know what a NoSQL is.

I'm not sure that I understand your point. It seems very reasonable to me to consider a raw HDFS as a type of NoSQL data storage mechanism, with other components of the Hadoop framework acting on top of it as query languages and other utilities.

Of course we can bikeshed all day and split hairs about the precise definitions, but in the spirit of pragmatism, I would absolutely put "Hadoop" as a form of NoSQL storage solution. In fact, I'd say the most distinct of the items mentioned is Redis, and Redis is the tool from this list that has use cases that tend to differ the most significantly from traditional RDBMSs (I'm thinking specifically cases where Redis is used as a buffering layer to help relieve congestion for a highly visited base data store). But even so, I still don't think it represents any sort of taxonomic error to put them all in the NoSQL category, at least for practical purposes.

Re: MySQL is a Better NoSQL

#12

Post by yoava »

DigitalSea wrote: post #5

MySQL is great and all, but if you want a better database that is considerably more powerful and supports NoSQL type scenarios: PostgreSQL. The fact that Postgres has supported working with JSON like key/value store data for a while now and it is quite decent, as well as giving you other options if you decide you want the traditional approach of tables.

When we started with this use case, at 2008, PostgreSQL did not look so good. Today, to be honest, I'd probably try it for new projects, except for the vast experience with MySQL that we have at Wix

Re: MySQL is a Better NoSQL

#14

Post by hoodoof »

I did an extensive survey of NoSQL databases recently and for my particular requirements Postgres ended up being the best choice. I examined MySQL too in this particular survey. Can't remember why but its JSON handling didn't meet my needs.

Every time I consider alternative databases -and I've done so several times in the past ten years - I do a thorough examination and the answer always seems to come back to Postgres. I'm not a particular Postgres fanboy but the answer just ends up at the same place.

Re: MySQL is a Better NoSQL

#15

Post by sterl »

hoodoof wrote: post #14

I did an extensive survey of NoSQL databases recently and for my particular requirements Postgres ended up being the best choice. I examined MySQL too in this particular survey. Can't remember why but its JSON handling didn't meet my needs. Every time I consider alternative databases -and I've done so several times in the past ten years - I do a thorough examination and the answer always seems to come back to Postgre…

I've experienced this time and time again. Postgres is an outstanding database for most use cases. I also love all the enhancements it has been getting over the last twenty four months.

If you haven't considered Postgres before, definitely check the project out.

Re: MySQL is a Better NoSQL

#16

Post by jhall1468 »

I'm going to question your knowledge of the domain immediately when your solution to a problem is to take away all of the advantages of SQL without any of the benefits that Cassandra or Redis provide.

To me this is akin to saying we don't need Haskell because Java now has lambda expressions.

Re: MySQL is a Better NoSQL

#17

Post by hitekker »

yoava wrote: post #12
DigitalSea wrote: post #5

MySQL is great and all, but if you want a better database that is considerably more powerful and supports NoSQL type scenarios: PostgreSQL. The fact that Postgres has supported working with JSON like key/value store data for a while now and it is quite decent, as well as giving you other options if you decide you want the traditional approach of tables.

When we started with this use case, at 2008, PostgreSQL did not look so good. Today, to be honest, I'd probably try it for new projects, except for the vast experience with MySQL that we have at Wix

If interested, You may wish to make a first level comment so people can reply and ask questions about your blog post.

Re: MySQL is a Better NoSQL

#18

Post by orf »

javajosh wrote: post #8
JonahBraun wrote: post #4

Interesting that he advocates MySQL. PostgreSQL can index and interact with the JSON stored in it's columns, which make it a better choice as a NoSQL replacement. http://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.4/static/datatype-json.html

The JSON datatype is only useful if you want to query on the blob, which is not the case in Wix's case.

You can query on individual fields with the jsonb type

Re: MySQL is a Better NoSQL

#19

Post by hoodoof »

jhall1468 wrote: post #16

I'm going to question your knowledge of the domain immediately when your solution to a problem is to take away all of the advantages of SQL without any of the benefits that Cassandra or Redis provide. To me this is akin to saying we don't need Haskell because Java now has lambda expressions.

I know nothing about Cassandra.

I question however the ability of Redis to index JSON fields and store/retrieve the JSON document in a way that is easy to program and reason about. I'm not an expert though so can you please correct me?

Re: MySQL is a Better NoSQL

#20

Post by yoava »

viraptor wrote: post #13
halayli wrote: post #3

> "MongoDB, Cassandra, Redis, or Hadoop" Adding Hadoop in the mix tells me he doesn't know what a NoSQL is.

Does anyone have a real, globally accepted NoSQL definition yet?

Well, it used to be databases that do not do SQL.

But now, that Cassandra has SQL like query language, hadoop has SQL like hive and other NoSQLs implement semi-SQL interfaces, I believe a good definition is a database that is not one of

1. ACID

2. Strongly typed table schema.

Post reply on HN