何时使用CouchDB与RDBMS [英] When to use CouchDB vs RDBMS
问题描述
- 直观的REST / HTTP接口 li>
- 轻松复制
- 将数据存储为文档而不是归一化表格
$ b b我知道这不是一个成熟的产品,所以应该谨慎采用,但我想知道它是否实际上是一个可行的替代RDBMS(尽管介绍页说,否则 - http://couchdb.apache.org/docs/intro.html )。
- 在什么情况下,CouchDB是比RDBMS(例如MySQL)更好的数据库选择。在可扩展性,设计+开发时间,可靠性和维护方面。
- 是否还有RDBMS仍然是正确选择的情况?
- 这是一个选择,还是作为最佳实践出现的混合解决方案?
我最近参加了在伦敦的NoSQL会议,认为我现在有一个更好的主意,现在如何回答原来的问题。我还写了一个博客帖子,还有几个其他 good 。
要点:
- 积累了大约30年管理关系数据库的知识,所以不应该仔细考虑替换它们;非关系数据存储不如关系数据存储成熟,因此采用 固有的风险更大。
- 存在不同类型的非关系数据存储;一些是键值存储,一些是文档存储,一些是图表数据库。
- 您可以使用混合方法,例如。社交软件网站的RDBMS和图形数据存储的组合
- 文档数据存储(例如CouchDB和MongoDB)可能最接近关系数据库,并提供包含所有字段的JSON数据结构
- 非关系型数据库支持复制(包括(但不限于)主 - 主);关系数据库也支持复制,但它可能不像非关系选项那么全面。
- 很大的网站,如Twitter,Digg和Facebook使用Cassandra,支持聚类
- 关系数据库可能适用于90%的案例
似乎是谨慎行事。
I am looking at CouchDB, which has a number of appealing features over relational databases including:
- intuitive REST/HTTP interface
- easy replication
- data stored as documents, rather than normalised tables
I appreciate that this is not a mature product so should be adopted with caution, but am wondering whether it is actually a viable replacement for an RDBMS (in spite of the intro page saying otherwise - http://couchdb.apache.org/docs/intro.html).
- Under what circumstances would CouchDB be a better choice of database than an RDBMS (e.g. MySQL), e.g. in terms of scalability, design + development time, reliability and maintenance.
- Are there still cases where an RDBMS is still clearly the right choice?
- Is this an either-or choice, or is a hybrid solution more likely to emerge as best practice?
I recently attended the NoSQL conference in London and think I have a better idea now how to answer the original question. I also wrote a blog post, and there are a couple of other good ones.
Key points:
- We have accumulated probably 30 years knowledge of adminstering relational databases, so shouldn't replace them without careful consideration; non-relational data stores are less mature than relational ones, and so are inherently more risky to adopt
- There are different types of non-relational data store; some are key-value stores, some are document stores, some are graph databases
- You could use a hybrid approach, e.g. a combination of RDBMS and graph data store for a social software site
- Document data stores (e.g. CouchDB and MongoDB) are probably the closest to relational databases and provide a JSON data structure with all the fields presented hierarchically which avoids having to do table joins, and (some might argue) is an improvement on the traditional object-relational mapping that most applications currently use
- Non-relational databases support replication (including master-master); relational databases support replication too but it may not be as comprehensive as the non-relational option
- Very large sites such as Twitter, Digg and Facebook use Cassandra, which is built from the ground up to support clustering
- Relational databases are probably suitable for 90% of cases
In summary, consensus seems to be "proceed with caution".
这篇关于何时使用CouchDB与RDBMS的文章就介绍到这了,希望我们推荐的答案对大家有所帮助,也希望大家多多支持IT屋!