« Hot Scalability Links for July 30, 2010 | Main | A Metric A$$-Ton of Joe Stump: The Cloud is Cheaper than Bare Metal »

YeSQL: An Overview of the Various Query Semantics in the Post Only-SQL World

The NoSQL movement faults the SQL query language as the source of many of the scalability issues that we face today with traditional database approach.

I think that the main reason so many people have come to see SQL as the source of all evil is the fact that, traditionally, the query language was burned into the database implementation. So by saying NoSQL you basically say "No" to the traditional non-scalable RDBMS implementations.

This view has brought on a flood of alternative query languages, each aiming to solve a different aspect that is missing in the traditional SQL query approach, such as a document model, or that provides a simpler approach, such as Key/Value query.

Most of the people I speak with seem fairly confused on this subject, and tend to use query semantics and architecture interchangeably. In Part I of this post i tried to provide quick overview of what each query term stands for in the context of the NoSQL world . Part II illustrates those ideas using  code examples from GigaSpaces and Datanucleus/Hbase.

See  Part I , Part II for more information..




References (2)

References allow you to track sources for this article, as well as articles that were written in response to this article.

Reader Comments (4)

"The NoSQL movement faults the SQL query language [...]"
I've never seen that written or heard it said by anyone in the NoSQL underground resistance movement. Do you have any pointers? Or is this just a straw man argument?

July 28, 2010 | Unregistered CommenterMikeD

I believe, NoSQL, stands for Not Only SQL and is being misinterpreted (maybe on purpose) for "No SQL". SQL or Not depends on how the application is designed and architected.

July 29, 2010 | Unregistered CommenterDickey Singh

"I've never seen that written or heard it said by anyone in the NoSQL underground resistance movement. Do you have any pointers? Or is this just a straw man argument?"

See one of the first posts on that subject which sparked the entire NoSQL movement here

SQL is an awkward fit for procedural code, and almost all code is procedural," said Curt Monash, an independent database analyst and blogger. For data upon which users expect to do heavy, repeated manipulations, the cost of mapping data into SQL is "well worth paying ... But when your database structure is very, very simple, SQL may not seem that beneficial."

There is a reason why most if not all of the NoSQL implementation doesn't support SQL and are often reffed to as Key/Value store as a result of that.

July 29, 2010 | Unregistered CommenterNati Shalom

"I've never seen that written or heard it said by anyone in the NoSQL movement"
The name says it. And everybody talking about it say SQL is evil.
It's crazy. What they don't like is the relational model, which is independent of SQL. What's really annoying is that many people I read talking about NoSQL and who much better MongoDB is against "lame", old-skool MySQL, are people who don't even know what the relational model is and how to design a properly normalized database.

On the other hand, you have people and/or companies like Facebook and Google that, really, do have problems with the relational model and have a justification to use other alternatives. But those kool-aid kids that just want to run their wordpress blob on a "NoSQL" platform don't know what they're talking about.

August 2, 2010 | Unregistered CommenterJJ

PostPost a New Comment

Enter your information below to add a new comment.
Author Email (optional):
Author URL (optional):
Some HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>