04-10-2017, 13:18
Buenas como va?
El otro día me topé con el siguiente artículo:
https://blog.timescale.com/why-sql-beati...8b777b847a
Es muy interesante lo que dice y les recomiendo que lo lean de principio a fin.
En resumen: NoSQL no estaría cumpliendo las expectativas y SQL regresó como Luke Skywalker en "El Regreso del Jedi" a recuperar la república de las bases de datos
Obviamente el artículo dice mucho más, pero me voy a focalizar en esto:
"Developers soon found that not having SQL was actually quite limiting. Each NoSQL database offered its own unique query language, which meant: more languages to learn (and to teach to your coworkers); increased difficulty in connecting these databases to applications, leading to tons of brittle glue code; a lack of a third party ecosystem, requiring companies to develop their own operational and visualization tools.
These NoSQL languages, being new, were also not fully developed. For example, there had been years of work in relational databases to add necessary features to SQL (e.g., JOINs); the immaturity of NoSQL languages meant more complexity was needed at the application level. The lack of JOINs also led to denormalization, which led to data bloat and rigidity.
Some NoSQL databases added their own “SQL-like” query languages, like Cassandra’s CQL. But this often made the problem worse. Using an interface that is almost identical to something more common actually created more mental friction: engineers didn’t know what was supported and what wasn’t.
[...]
Initially seduced by the dark side, the software community began to see the light and come back to SQL.
First came the SQL interfaces on top of Hadoop (and later, Spark), leading the industry to “back-cronym” NoSQL to “Not Only SQL” (yeah, nice try).
[...]
Is SQL perfect? No, but it is the language that most of us in the community know. And while there are already engineers out there working on a more natural language oriented interface, what will those systems then connect to? SQL "
Que empiece el debate
El otro día me topé con el siguiente artículo:
https://blog.timescale.com/why-sql-beati...8b777b847a
Es muy interesante lo que dice y les recomiendo que lo lean de principio a fin.
En resumen: NoSQL no estaría cumpliendo las expectativas y SQL regresó como Luke Skywalker en "El Regreso del Jedi" a recuperar la república de las bases de datos
Obviamente el artículo dice mucho más, pero me voy a focalizar en esto:
"Developers soon found that not having SQL was actually quite limiting. Each NoSQL database offered its own unique query language, which meant: more languages to learn (and to teach to your coworkers); increased difficulty in connecting these databases to applications, leading to tons of brittle glue code; a lack of a third party ecosystem, requiring companies to develop their own operational and visualization tools.
These NoSQL languages, being new, were also not fully developed. For example, there had been years of work in relational databases to add necessary features to SQL (e.g., JOINs); the immaturity of NoSQL languages meant more complexity was needed at the application level. The lack of JOINs also led to denormalization, which led to data bloat and rigidity.
Some NoSQL databases added their own “SQL-like” query languages, like Cassandra’s CQL. But this often made the problem worse. Using an interface that is almost identical to something more common actually created more mental friction: engineers didn’t know what was supported and what wasn’t.
[...]
Initially seduced by the dark side, the software community began to see the light and come back to SQL.
First came the SQL interfaces on top of Hadoop (and later, Spark), leading the industry to “back-cronym” NoSQL to “Not Only SQL” (yeah, nice try).
[...]
Is SQL perfect? No, but it is the language that most of us in the community know. And while there are already engineers out there working on a more natural language oriented interface, what will those systems then connect to? SQL "
Que empiece el debate