Also worth a read: CouchDB Expectations http://www.davispj.com/posts/10
" The most important part of this entire post is the following statement: The only time when CouchDB should be considered as a replacement for an RDBMS is when an RDBMS was the wrong choice in the first place. Just as CouchDB is not always the right tool for the job, RDBMS's are also not always the right answer. Now, to be clear, my financial and medical institutions better damn well be using some sort of RDBMS that has all of those fancy features. My blog on the other hand (if it weren't static) does not require materialized views or pivot tables. " - Richard On Sat, Jan 3, 2009 at 5:39 PM, Richard D. Worth <rdwo...@gmail.com> wrote: > See also http://couchdb.apache.org/docs/intro.html > > " > What CouchDB is > * A document database server, accessible via a RESTful JSON API. > * Ad-hoc and schema-free with a flat address space. > * Distributed, featuring robust, incremental replication with > bi-directional conflict detection and management. > * Query-able and index-able, featuring a table oriented reporting engine > that uses Javascript as a query language. > > What it is Not > * A relational database. > * A replacement for relational databases. > * An object-oriented database. Or more specifically, meant to function as > a seamless persistence layer for an OO programming language. > " > > - Richard > > > On Sat, Jan 3, 2009 at 5:34 PM, donb <falconwatc...@comcast.net> wrote: > >> >> I think it's rather bold to say 'better' rather than just >> 'different.' It's unclear how a couchDB database would fare with >> perhaps 50 million items stored in it, or if couchDB would be at all >> suitable for answering queries such as 'how many salespeople reached >> their quotas during the last quarter.' Further, the 'benefit' of a >> schemaless database seems undesirable to any application where data >> integrity and transaction processing are important. There was a time >> that Microsoft Access was similarly touted as 'the best' because >> anyone and everyone could whip up a database with no experience. >> Many, if not most, of these were horrendous mishmashes of gobbledegook >> that performed badly and were nightmarish to maintain after awhile. >> >> So while I have no direct experience with couchDB, I feel confident >> saying it is not absolutely better than mysql, but that it might be >> better in some situation(s) and much worse in others. >> >> >> On Jan 3, 4:04 pm, mobiledream...@gmail.com wrote: >> > http://pylab.blogspot.com/2009/01/ten-reasons-why-couchdb-is-better-t. >> .. >> > >> > Guys I wrote up a small list of reasons why i think couchdb is way >> bettter >> > than mysql. Do let me know what you think >> > >> > -- >> > Gpirate the top torrent search enginehttp://gpirate.com >> > >
