4 ms·

...data warehouses in general mostly use SQL, and lots of businesses use data warehouses successfully. Teradata, Netezza, Oracle, DB2, etc. I'm not sure why h

...data warehouses in general mostly use SQL, and lots of businesses use data warehouses successfully. Teradata, Netezza, Oracle, DB2, etc. I'm not sure why his statement was controversial - SQL's a great language for reporting and analytics.

PommeDeTerre 14y ago
I've had to deal with a lot of NoSQL advocates whose experience with SQL or relational databases doesn't extend beyond MySQL. Of course, it's understandable why they have a bad impression of SQL; they've only ever used one of the most inept implementations around. Those who are willing to try one of the more mature and sensible relational database systems usually see quite quickly the value that such systems provide.
- raylu 14y ago
  What do you suggest?
  - gbog 14y ago
    Not the OP but I'd say giving Postgres a try is a suggestion.
- bermanoid 14y ago
  Beyond a few terabytes of data, Postgres is just as worthless as MySQL, and every other non-experimental SQL option comes with a "call us" price tag. If there are production-ready options for biggish data other than NoSQL or high priced commercial analytics dbs, please share...
  - petit_robert 14y ago
    Considering the space requirements of a DB with a properly designed schema, I have to wonder what on earth you can do that generates beyond a few terabytes of data, and how you can make any sense out of it. Also, your comment is rather ambiguous, I certainly hope you're not calling Postgresql experimental, because that would be laughable; and there are several examples of multi-terabyte databases using it.
taligent 14y ago
>Real businesses need a data warehouse and SQL is the right tool for that job. SQL is NOT always the right tool for the job. There are plenty of situations where an Hadoop or a Storm/S4 approach works better. Again it's about picking the right technology for the task at hand.
- jl6 14y ago
  SQL is an excellent tool for a data warehouse, or any situation where there is value in separating data design from application design. In such situations the infamous o/r impedance mismatch is arguably a good thing.

PommeDeTerre 14y ago

I've had to deal with a lot of NoSQL advocates whose experience with SQL or relational databases doesn't extend beyond MySQL. Of course, it's understandable why they have a bad impression of SQL; they've only ever used one of the most inept implementations around. Those who are willing to try one of the more mature and sensible relational database systems usually see quite quickly the value that such systems provide.

raylu 14y ago
What do you suggest?
- gbog 14y ago
  Not the OP but I'd say giving Postgres a try is a suggestion.
bermanoid 14y ago
Beyond a few terabytes of data, Postgres is just as worthless as MySQL, and every other non-experimental SQL option comes with a "call us" price tag. If there are production-ready options for biggish data other than NoSQL or high priced commercial analytics dbs, please share...
- petit_robert 14y ago
  Considering the space requirements of a DB with a properly designed schema, I have to wonder what on earth you can do that generates beyond a few terabytes of data, and how you can make any sense out of it. Also, your comment is rather ambiguous, I certainly hope you're not calling Postgresql experimental, because that would be laughable; and there are several examples of multi-terabyte databases using it.

taligent 14y ago

>Real businesses need a data warehouse and SQL is the right tool for that job. SQL is NOT always the right tool for the job. There are plenty of situations where an Hadoop or a Storm/S4 approach works better. Again it's about picking the right technology for the task at hand.

jl6 14y ago
SQL is an excellent tool for a data warehouse, or any situation where there is value in separating data design from application design. In such situations the infamous o/r impedance mismatch is arguably a good thing.