For Web Applications on the Cloud CouchDB and MongolDB *are* replaying RDBMS.
On Wed, Jul 14, 2010 at 7:16 PM, Trent Shipley <trent_ship...@yahoo.com>wrote: > Do those massive, distributed, and fast Internet platforms give up > flexibility? A RDBMS is designed as a general solution for storing and > querying structured data. If the Internet solutions are general solutions > why haven't they displaced the enterprise scale solutions? > > > ------------------------------ > *From:* Joseph Sinclair <plug-discuss...@stcaz.net> > *To:* Main PLUG discussion list <plug-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us> > *Sent:* Wed, July 14, 2010 6:45:26 PM > *Subject:* Re: App Engine? > > MySQL IS a single-server environment. No single MySQL instance spans > multiple servers. Clustering doesn't make software distributed, it makes it > clustered (which is COMPLETELY different). > Cassandra is NOTHING like MySQL. It actually is a distributed > column-oriented datastore (and it's NOT an RDBMS). Cassandra is not > clustered either, it's *distributed*. > Try this: > Cluster 50 MySQL instances; randomly pull power (without warning or > shutdown) on 10. Is the cluster still able to serve all rows? Did you > loose any data or transactions? > Run a 50-node Cassandra instance (single instance, 50 machines); randomly > pull power (without warning or shutdown) on 10. Is the instance still able > to serve all rows? Did you loose any data? > That experiment will show you one of the MANY ways distributed systems are > different from clustered (without having to run 2000 machines to see the > difference). > > Facebook uses actual distributed software (things like Hadoop, Hive, > Cassandra, etc...) They don't run their site off of MySQL (or Oracle, for > that matter). > Digg uses distributed systems as well, because scaling to their load is > "increasingly difficult with MySQL" (http://about.digg.com/node/564). > There isn't a clustered solution possible that would handle their scale, in > fact they haven't been using a cluster, in the traditional sense, for years. > > All of them use things like MySQL for smaller, internal-facing systems, but > none of them use *any* RDBMS for a user-facing site. > I can show you conclusively that MySQL (and any RDBMS) fails at large scale > because the n^2 locking problem kills it. > Clustering is fine for an Enterprise application. It's death for an > Internet application. > > Amazon runs amazingly fast, have you actually used Amazon.com (you do > realize that their cloud offerings are the same infrastructure they use to > run their own sites?). > Google.com gets search results in <1 second every time. Try doing that > with MySQL or Oracle. Neither is capable of even storing a small part of > the index; their internal limits won't permit a table that big, much less an > indexed table. > > If all you've ever built is enterprise apps with less than 100,000 users, > you'll never understand why enterprise solutions don't scale to Internet > numbers (100 million users or more). 5 years ago, I would have agreed with > you; that was before I had to write software that could process more than > 40,000,000 transactions per day and produce multidimensional analyses of all > that data. > There's a completely different world of scale between 100,000 users and 100 > million users, and solutions for the smaller scale are completely useless at > the larger scale. > There are lots of people who think dumping their LAMP site on EC2 will make > it fast, they're wrong. > You have to design for scale when you build the software. > > AppEngine, BTW, is also good for small low-volume applications, just > because it can be MUCH cheaper to run a small app on AppEngine than to run a > hosted server (particularly if you want to write in Java or Python rather > than PHP). > > I've developed on Google's and Amazon's platforms. I've also written (and > am writing) the kind of distributed infrastructure those two use to enable > their huge sites. Not many systems require that kind of scale; for those > that do there's no alternative to real lock-free/contention-free distributed > systems. > > When was the last time your app generated <100ms response times doing > multiple PKI operations on 4M-40M files while sustaining >2000 > requests/minute on <10 commodity servers with no special hardware? > > ==Joseph++ > > Bryan O'Neal wrote: > > Joseph they are not a single server environment. You cluster them! It > > is like saying MySQL or Casandra are single server environments - > > combine them all and that would be one hell of a server sites like > > Facebook and Dig run off of ;) > > As for Fast - try Google's or Amazon's offering - WOW That is some > > speed! You'll start to feel like it's running on a cluster of iPhones! > > > > On Tue, Jul 13, 2010 at 9:05 PM, Joseph Sinclair > > <plug-discuss...@stcaz.net> wrote: > >> Apache and Tomcat are not even close to distributed computing > environments. > >> They're single-server environments, and neither is even particularly > fast in that role. > >> They are both well known and well supported, however. > >> If your application is simple enough to run on a single server (no > matter how many users, as long as there aren't too many at one time), then > that type of solution is fine (and a lot easier to program). > >> If your application's processing gets more complex as more users log in > (relatively few applications do this), then no number of instances of a > single-server-model web-server will handle the load, and you'll have to > accept harder programming in order to scale beyond a few hundred thousand > users. > >> > >> > >> Bryan O'Neal wrote: > >>> Every time I run the analysis your better off writing for a > >>> distributable open source app engine, like Apache / Tomcat. And > >>> horizontally spanning as required on commodity hosts, like go daddy. > >>> > >>> On Tue, Jul 13, 2010 at 7:00 PM, Doc Media <doc_me...@yahoo.com> > wrote: > >>>> Anyone had experience (good or bad) with Google's App Engine? �A > friend > >>>> of mine was looking to start a project, and we were discussing the > finer > >>>> points of a regular hosting company versus something like App Engine. > >>>> Any insights would be helpful. > >>>> > >>>> - Scott > >> > >> > >> --------------------------------------------------- > >> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us > >> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: > >> http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss > >> > > --------------------------------------------------- > > PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us > > To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: > > http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss > > > > --------------------------------------------------- > PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us > To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: > http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss >
--------------------------------------------------- PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
