Ask HN: Why don't most NoSQL DBMSs have “pointers”?
But of the many NoSQL solutions out there, why do just so few of them realize that this model would be awesome (exception I know of would be OrientDB and Neo4j) for many practical cases, not only ones that need graph traversals. I mean, when you need things like multi-joins, you need to ping pong Mongo and do N queries instead of one.
Isn't the use case NoSQL document-db enough overallaping with the one of graph DBs that such a feature would make sense and would just provide all the practical features of SQL-joins to the NoSQL solutions with not much extra cost, and for most queries would make indexes useless, and take up much less space for huge datasets?
(...and as a bonus any NoSQL solution would be ready to use as a graph db, and doing a ~100 nodes path length traversal of a graph stored in Mongo would just automagically work fast enough)
1 comment
[ 4.0 ms ] story [ 11.4 ms ] threadIMO the whole idea behind NoSQL was to gain horizontal scaling, by scarifying some nice guarantees. There's no silver bullet, if you want to gain performance for a very specific workload, you use one of hundreds NoSQL databases that fits your data. If you want a general purpose database you will be better off just using RDBMS.
General purpose NoSQL databases are snake oil. For example Mongo doesn't scale well both vertically[1] and horizontally[2].
[1] http://blogs.enterprisedb.com/2014/09/24/postgres-outperform...
[2] http://www.datastax.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/WP-Benchm...