[dba-SQLServer] PK/ANPK Debate

Hi Mark

But were the data structure so that you just as well could have used relational SQL storage?

/gustav

-----Oprindelig meddelelse-----
Fra: dba-sqlserver-bounces at databaseadvisors.com [mailto:dba-sqlserver-bounces at databaseadvisors.com] På vegne af Mark Breen
Sendt: 12. marts 2014 09:57
Til: Discussion concerning MS SQL Server
Emne: Re: [dba-SQLServer] PK/ANPK Debate

Hello Shamil,

yes, I agree completely, this is a much more up to date thread to discuss.

I worked on a project last year that had to store thousands or tens of thousands of records.  However, they wanted 100% failsafe fail over.  They used two mongo dbs and they told me the db's just take care of they syncing.

That is interesting to me.  Nowadays with hardware so cheap, it is interesting to think that we can have two or three servers running our BE.

But as you are hinting at, it is a new mindshift, one that we have to open up to sooner or later,

not necessarily to store billions or records, but as a new way to store data.

Mark



On 12 March 2014 05:25, Salakhetdinov Shamil <mcp2004 at mail.ru> wrote:

>  Yes, but here in dba-SQL-Server "SQL Server vs. NoSQL" "holy war" 
> thread would be more suitable than "Bound vs Unbound controls", should 
> we ask Arthur to initiate it? ;)