SQL (MySQL) vs NoSQL (CouchDB) [closed]

Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.

---

Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing 开发者_开发技巧this post.

Closed 7 years ago.

Improve this question

I am in the middle of designing a highly-scalable application which must store a lot of data. Just for example it will store lots about users and then things like a lot of their messages, comments etc. I have always used MySQL before but now I am minded to try something new like couchdb or similar which is not SQL.

Does anyone have any thoughts or guidance on this?

---

Here's a quote from a recent blog post from Dare Obasanjo.

SQL databases are like automatic transmission and NoSQL databases are like manual transmission. Once you switch to NoSQL, you become responsible for a lot of work that the system takes care of automatically in a relational database system. Similar to what happens when you pick manual over automatic transmission. Secondly, NoSQL allows you to eke more performance out of the system by eliminating a lot of integrity checks done by relational databases from the database tier. Again, this is similar to how you can get more performance out of your car by driving a manual transmission versus an automatic transmission vehicle.

However the most notable similarity is that just like most of us can’t really take advantage of the benefits of a manual transmission vehicle because the majority of our driving is sitting in traffic on the way to and from work, there is a similar harsh reality in that most sites aren’t at Google or Facebook’s scale and thus have no need for a Bigtable or Cassandra.

To which I can add only that switching from MySQL, where you have at least some experience, to CouchDB, where you have no experience, means you will have to deal with a whole new set of problems and learn different concepts and best practices. While by itself this is wonderful (I am playing at home with MongoDB and like it a lot), it will be a cost that you need to calculate when estimating the work for that project, and brings unknown risks while promising unknown benefits. It will be very hard to judge if you can do the project on time and with the quality you want/need to be successful, if it's based on a technology you don't know.

Now, if you have on the team an expert in the NoSQL field, then by all means take a good look at it. But without any expertise on the team, don't jump on NoSQL for a new commercial project.

Update: Just to throw some gasoline in the open fire you started, here are two interesting articles from people on the SQL camp. :-)

I Can't Wait for NoSQL to Die (original article is gone, here's a copy)
Fighting The NoSQL Mindset, Though This Isn't an anti-NoSQL Piece
Update: Well here is an interesting article about NoSQL
Making Sense of NoSQL

---

Seems like only real solutions today revolve around scaling out or sharding. All modern databases (NoSQLs as well as NewSQLs) support horizontal scaling right out of the box, at the database layer, without the need for the application to have sharding code or something.

Unfortunately enough, for the trusted good-old MySQL, sharding is not provided "out of the box". ScaleBase (disclaimer: I work there) is a maker of a complete scale-out solution an "automatic sharding machine" if you like. ScaleBae analyzes your data and SQL stream, splits the data across DB nodes, and aggregates in runtime – so you won’t have to! And it's free download.

Don't get me wrong, NoSQLs are great, they're new, new is more choice and choice is always good!! But choosing NoSQL comes with a price, make sure you can pay it...

You can see here some more data about MySQL, NoSQL...: http://www.scalebase.com/extreme-scalability-with-mongodb-and-mysql-part-1-auto-sharding

Hope that helped.

---

One of the best options is to go for MongoDB(NOSql dB) that supports scalability.Stores large amounts of data nothing but bigdata in the form of documents unlike rows and tables in sql.This is fasters that follows sharding of the data.Uses replicasets to ensure data guarantee that maintains multiple servers having primary db server as the base. Language independent. Flexible to use