Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Comment Re:Why not both? (Score 1) 164

This isn't totally true. In MongoDB, for example, you don't even really have to think about the "primary key" for every document. Many times I don't know it or even care to. If you wants to look up customers in by name, you'd index the last_name and first_name fields and then do your query like so: db.users.find({last_name : 'Cluster', first_name : 'Lost'})

An excellent example.

I think of the NoSQL world as "get a document/piece of data by an indexed data column". It works very well for that. SQL is better for "correlate and compute summation on these data with these sets of conditions".

Comment Re:Why not both? (Score 2) 164

There's another piece to the definition. The traditional RDBMS (Oracle, DB2, SQL Server, MySQL, PostgreSQL) is designed to give 100% consistent results. All other design goals are sacrificed so that two people asking the DB the same question at the same time will get the same answer, and no one can make a modification and someone else gets an answer that is not 100% up to date. NoSQL trades consistency for flexibility/simpler scalability.

If you post something on a social network at 1:00 and your friend in a different timezone looks at 1:00:10 and doesn't see the update, no big deal. If one person authorizes $500 on your credit card at 1:00 and consumes your limit and someone else tries to authorize $300 at 1:00:10 and it goes through because the DBMS isn't giving consistent answers, that's a problem.

They're just systems with two different design goals. Some DBs will let you restrict this - SQL Server 2008R2 has a "replicate to nodes" setup that tries to stay 100% in sync but doesn't guarantee it. OTOH, something like Oracle RAC is always 100% in sync because there's only one set of datafiles shared by everyone.

I said "simpler scalability" because the idea that SQL-based RDBMS systems can't scale to any length is ridiculous - all credit card processing, bank transactions, airline reservations, Amazon orders, etc. all flow through very traditional RDBMS of one of the flavors I mentioned. However, it's a lot more complicated than scaling NoSQL. Getting that guarantee of consistency is not easy once you outgrow a single server, need 100% (not 99.999%) uptime, etc..

NoSQL is also better for large document storage. Traditional RDBMS has LOBs but they're a later add-on and it somewhat shows. Want to store a few gigabytes of LOBs in your DB? Sure. Want to store terabytes of big LOBs and use your DB as a transactional filesystem? It can be done, but it won't be pretty.

All in all, it depends on what you're trying to do.

Comment Re:botched processor design? (Score 5, Interesting) 497

Itanic is not a buggy or bad design. It's just a design without a good market. If you were doing a lot of computation where that last .01% of performance was important and you had the time/budget to write Itanium-specific assembler, you'd love Itanium (64 64-bit registers is nice). It's just solves problems that most people don't have.

Comment Re:Lawyers rake it in (Score 1) 130

Get over it.

I think the OP is pointing out the ritual of class action lawsuits in America. A CAL is filed and won or settled for tens or hundreds of millions of dollars. Lawyers take 30-50% and the rest is divided over the huge pool in the class, hence often resulting in a few bucks each.

It's a perverted system - as a big company, you are spared having to pay anything of substance to each litigant, yet the overall effect is still big. Lawyers love it because they get rich.

I usually get 2-3 letters or postcards a year informing me that I'm potentially part of a CAL because a had a Mastercard four years ago, or I exchanged foreign currency with company X in 2005, or because I changed flight reservations in 2006, or some other event that I've completely forgotten. Just check boxes A and B and sign on the line, and you get a check for $5-10 in three months, and you can check the status at SomeBigCompanySettlement.com. It's a weird part of modern life.

Comment Re:Nope. (Score 1) 416

You'd be surprised how little it costs to get by. And if you're married, you can divide the labor between you two.

"Getting by" is OK when you're single or married without kids is one thing. It's not when you have kids, and have to consider their expenses, health care, college, what happens if you die, etc.

Comment Re:IBM POWER servers (Score 1) 375

They're probably the last bastion of American computer assembly - I believe you can actually get an option code that certifies that an IBM POWER machine is made in the US of US components, even, intended for national security applications.

Interesting. Does that extends down to the source of all the raw materials?

Comment Re:It's very simple (Score 1) 375

Try to avoid misogynistic language.

Nowhere do the OP even remotely imply hating women. You are taking an extreme term and using it in an inappropriate context.

Ted Bundy was a misogynist. Someone who says it's manly to stand up for your beliefs is not. Someone who says such a person is a misogynist is either an idiot or trying to impress feminists in freshmen Women's Studies discussion sessions. Given the time to acclimate, I would guess second half of the year...like, say, February

Slashdot Top Deals

To write good code is a worthy challenge, and a source of civilized delight. -- stolen and paraphrased from William Safire

Working...