One other good thing that might be worth mentioning is that it sounds like the migration path away from couch was pretty easy.
On 11 May 2012 12:28, Jason Smith <[email protected]> wrote: > Thanks for the tip, Noah. > > In addition to solving its technical and community deficiencies, we > all be banging on non-stop about why CouchDB is good for you: > > * Zero data loss (I can't believe it merits saying, but hey, there we are) > * They built a successful product, because CouchDB cuts with the grain > of the web > * They built a successful business, similarly > * Simple, transparent, confidence-instilling backups > * It was a lot of fun > > ## The Story of CouchDB > > People don't acknowledge enough how great SQL is for a maturing > company. Setting "product" aside, relational databases help build > businesses. CouchDB is not a "NoSQL" database, it is a > "domain-specific database." NoSQL could mean anything. When I have sex > there is no SQL. It's NoSQL! (Sometimes, there is no transaction > either.) > > The point is, bosses tend to ask relational questions. How many new > signups from last month are on the west coast and referred a friend? > How many leads converted to sales? Where is our product demanded most? > On a domain-specific DBs, the answer is a programming project. On > MySQL, it's a query. (I'm simplifying, but you all get it.) > > Couch should not claim to solve or even address those problems. The > story should be, "get your product done fast, and right. Ship it > today, and be poised to solve tomorrow's problems tomorrow." > > (Note, I ignore Couch's problems in this message, not to downplay > them, but rather to keep focus.) > > On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 12:53 AM, Noah Slater <[email protected]> wrote: >> Guys, >> >> What can we learn from this: >> >> http://saucelabs.com/blog/index.php/2012/05/goodbye-couchdb/ >> >> >> Thanks, >> >> N > > > > -- > Iris Couch
