jwcolby
jwcolby at colbyconsulting.com
Mon Sep 19 21:31:07 CDT 2011
Mark, If I ever needed them then I would of course look much harder. But my databases are relational, that is just what I do. MySQl or a derivative is looking interesting. I went with SQL Server because Microsoft gave me the tools for free. However they did so for a reason, so that I would develop in them and then promote them. I do develop in them, and I will certainly promote them when appropriate. I think SQl Server is a powerful solution, and relative to oracle quite inexpensive. But I also think that there is a class of company (about the size that I work with) where even SQL Server and Windows 2008 is too expensive. Of course SBS is the MS answer and it is an awesome answer. I tried to promote it in this situation but the requirement to be the center of their universe (the domain server) kind of killed the deal. They are already set up there and are rightly reluctant to mess with something that is working. So here we are looking for something truly cheap. I would love to build a Linux box on their new hardware and run MySQL on top of that. Unfortunately I have had bad experiences with Linux in the past and I just don't have the time to battle it out when the inevitable something goes wrong. I actually tried to install to build a Linux VM using SuSE but the install on the VM failed and... well... I just don't have the time to battle with it. I installed Windows XP, then MySQL community edition, then WampServer and I am up in a VM. I did not try to build an Ubuntu VM. I suppose I should try that before I fold. I fantisized that I was going to go find an existing Linux VM all zipped up and ready to unzip and mount under Hyper-V. So far that hasn't happened. I am convinced they are out there, and I can find them under VMWare but I am wedded to Hyper-V at the moment. Anyway I have MySQL up and running under Windows XP. If anyone is interested I can let folks in on a private Hamachi network to play with it. I am setting up to have it be the MySQL Server and I will try to manipulate it remotely from another machine. John W. Colby www.ColbyConsulting.com On 9/19/2011 7:05 PM, Mark Breen wrote: > Hello John > > I 100% agree with you. > > NoSql databases (Azure for eg) are so far removed from relational databases, > that they do not belong in the same comparison, even the same discussion. > > I know they give you enormous scalablity, reliability and performance, but > the engineering in such an app cannot compare to what we do. Even your > monster db's are pip squeaks compared so these beasts typically do. > > In my mind, they are just stinkin' lists, and I am sticking with Ansi 92 > SQL. > > Mark > > > On 19 September 2011 17:23, jwcolby<jwcolby at colbyconsulting.com> wrote: > >>> Good question. I don't know, to be honest, but I get the sense that most >> of the momentum these days are in nosql databases. >> >> Well, let's say most of the *noise* is in those databases. And that is a >> good thing because the environment that requires those kinds of databases >> was under served. >> >> Notice however that the makers of those databases make no claim that they >> replace sql based databases. What they always say is that SQL databases >> don't do a good job of handling their requirements. >> >> I don't have the time to do a thorough evaluation of the nosql databases >> but from my reading they are a poor or even nonexistent fit for the things I >> do. >> >> >> John W. Colby >> www.ColbyConsulting.com >> >> On 9/19/2011 11:38 AM, Hans-Christian Andersen wrote: >> >>> John, >>> >>> Good question. I don't know, to be honest, but I get the sense that most >>> of >>> the momentum these days are in nosql databases. >>> >>> Hans-Christian >>> >>> >>> >>> > _______________________________________________ > dba-SQLServer mailing list > dba-SQLServer at databaseadvisors.com > http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/dba-sqlserver > http://www.databaseadvisors.com > >