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

A NoSQL Database with ACID Transactions

foundationdb.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

1–10 of 57 posts

Re: A NoSQL Database with ACID Transactions

#2

Post by awjr »

It's one of the 'bug bears' I find with new technologies where they try and use it for something it wasn't really designed for. The most recent being the idea of doing e-commerce with a no-sql db (mostly MongoDB). You are just using the wrong type of DB for this.

It's nice to find a NoSQL solution that addresses this issue.

Re: A NoSQL Database with ACID Transactions

#4

Post by stephenpiment »

awjr wrote: post #2

It's one of the 'bug bears' I find with new technologies where they try and use it for something it wasn't really designed for. The most recent being the idea of doing e-commerce with a no-sql db (mostly MongoDB). You are just using the wrong type of DB for this. It's nice to find a NoSQL solution that addresses this issue.

Transactions are great not only for e-commerce but for a broad range of applications. Take a look at our Transaction Manifesto: http://www.foundationdb.com/white-papers/the-transaction-man...

Re: A NoSQL Database with ACID Transactions

#5

Post by VexXtreme »

awjr wrote: post #2

It's one of the 'bug bears' I find with new technologies where they try and use it for something it wasn't really designed for. The most recent being the idea of doing e-commerce with a no-sql db (mostly MongoDB). You are just using the wrong type of DB for this. It's nice to find a NoSQL solution that addresses this issue.

A big part of the problem are developers who think that every new technology is a golden hammer and who try to shoehorn those same technologies into roles they are not well suited for.

A pretty obvious example is people using Redis and Mongo for applications that would really benefit the most from relational databases. If you have a highly relational model that would benefit from things like referential integrity and normalization then use a relational database. If you need a massive highly scalable KVP database, use NoSQL. I don't see why people try to use a single approach as a solution to every problem.

I thought this video about NoSQL fanboys was really hilarious: http://highscalability.com/blog/2010/9/5/hilarious-video-rel...

Re: A NoSQL Database with ACID Transactions

#7

Post by SeanKilleen »

I see C, node, ruby, and Java support...any plans for a .NET API as well? This seems like something that would be nice to mess around with there.

Would also be nice to understand what the intended pricing model will be (if any). If the plans are to keep this free, that would be pretty great.

Re: A NoSQL Database with ACID Transactions

#8

Post by egeozcan »

SeanKilleen wrote: post #7

I see C, node, ruby, and Java support...any plans for a .NET API as well? This seems like something that would be nice to mess around with there. Would also be nice to understand what the intended pricing model will be (if any). If the plans are to keep this free, that would be pretty great.

"We will offer FoundationDB as both a free community edition and a licensed version with support and larger cluster capability. The community edition will include the full capabilities of FoundationDB and will allow production deployment.

FoundationDB licenses will have reasonable and linear pricing. The license cost for a cluster, including support, will be similar to the operational cost of the commodity hardware in the cluster."

From: http://www.foundationdb.com/faq/

Re: A NoSQL Database with ACID Transactions

#9

Post by Dave_Rosenthal »

SeanKilleen wrote: post #7

I see C, node, ruby, and Java support...any plans for a .NET API as well? This seems like something that would be nice to mess around with there. Would also be nice to understand what the intended pricing model will be (if any). If the plans are to keep this free, that would be pretty great.

.NET and PHP are now our most-requested APIs on our community site; I think it's safe to say that those will be coming. We've already had a couple of people whip up quick .NET wrappers on top of our C APIs themselves.
Post reply on HN