Readings in Database Systems, 5th Edition (2015)
1–10 of 34 posts
Re: Readings in Database Systems, 5th Edition (2015)
#2This needs a [2015] tag.
The thing that makes the redbook special in my opinion is that the editors have been able to apply their research to solve actual problems for paying customers! You don't get to see enough of that in academia.
Re: Readings in Database Systems, 5th Edition (2015)
#3Michael Stonebraker has an interesting set of conclusions in his assessment of the MapReduce vendor market in 2015 from the "Dataflow" chapter here:
"- Just because Google thinks something is a good idea does not mean you should adopt it.
- Disbelieve all marketing spin, and figure out what benefit any given product actually has. This should be especially applied to performance claims.
- The community of programmers has a love affair with “the next shiny object”. This is likely to create “churn” in your organization, as the “half-life” of shiny objects may be quite short."
Re: Readings in Database Systems, 5th Edition (2015)
#4Michael Stonebraker has an interesting set of conclusions in his assessment of the MapReduce vendor market in 2015 from the "Dataflow" chapter here: "- Just because Google thinks something is a good idea does not mean you should adopt it. - Disbelieve all marketing spin, and figure out what benefit any given product actually has. This should be especially applied to performance claims. - The community of programmers…
Well, he's absolutely right. MapReduce apparently didn't last that long at Google — it's long been supplanted by other technologies internally.
Re: Readings in Database Systems, 5th Edition (2015)
#5Michael Stonebraker has an interesting set of conclusions in his assessment of the MapReduce vendor market in 2015 from the "Dataflow" chapter here: "- Just because Google thinks something is a good idea does not mean you should adopt it. - Disbelieve all marketing spin, and figure out what benefit any given product actually has. This should be especially applied to performance claims. - The community of programmers…
Well, he's absolutely right. MapReduce apparently didn't last that long at Google — it's long been supplanted by other technologies internally.
Which ones?
Re: Readings in Database Systems, 5th Edition (2015)
#6Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well, he's absolutely right. MapReduce apparently didn't last that long at Google — it's long been supplanted by other technologies internally.
Which ones?
As far as I remember, mostly Flume (open sourced as Apache Beam and also known as Cloud Dataflow on GCP).
Flume/Beam still provides map/reduce as operations, mind you, but with a much richer processing model.
Re: Readings in Database Systems, 5th Edition (2015)
#7Michael Stonebraker has an interesting set of conclusions in his assessment of the MapReduce vendor market in 2015 from the "Dataflow" chapter here: "- Just because Google thinks something is a good idea does not mean you should adopt it. - Disbelieve all marketing spin, and figure out what benefit any given product actually has. This should be especially applied to performance claims. - The community of programmers…
I think it's a bit of a shame that the MapReduce concept got the shiny object treatment since I thought it was a nice pragmatic approach to a useful set of problems that are faced all the time and often addressed with ad-hoc programs that make a mess.
People always looked down on those that used Hadoop or somesuch for Now many places are back in the world of one-off scripts, and I think something of value was lost (even if it was a little ridiculous to fire up a cluster for something Excel or SQLite could handle).
Re: Readings in Database Systems, 5th Edition (2015)
#8This needs a [2015] tag. The thing that makes the redbook special in my opinion is that the editors have been able to apply their research to solve actual problems for paying customers! You don't get to see enough of that in academia.
> This needs a [2015] tag.
That's debatable. It's a book, not a blog post.
Re: Readings in Database Systems, 5th Edition (2015)
#9This needs a [2015] tag. The thing that makes the redbook special in my opinion is that the editors have been able to apply their research to solve actual problems for paying customers! You don't get to see enough of that in academia.
where would one start if we wanted more up to date material on this domain?
Re: Readings in Database Systems, 5th Edition (2015)
#10[deleted]