Dynamo accelerated the NoSQL revolution that’s driving the database industry. Recently, Amazon for their flagship NoSQL database Amazon DynamoDB. This has brought the NoSQL “re:evolution” full circle. It’s wonderful to see the collaborative research from enabling the industry to move forward. announced PartiQL - A SQL-Compatible Query Language UCSD and Couchbase NoSQL had a good run. triggered it in 2004. and accelerated it in 2007. NoSQL meant no support for SQL, no support for multi-document transactions, no schema management, no procedural language, and many more No’s. MapReduce Dynamo BigTable However, NoSQL wasn’t a . It promised reliability, scalability, and flexibility. Someone quipped: “If you are not ready to scale, you’re not ready to succeed!”. rebel without a cause To the amusement of SQL folks, MongoDB claimed it’s . Despite the from the database community, the NoSQL movement marched on. Many wondered if it’s useful for Amazon, Google, and Facebook, who else would find it useful? webscale reservations and opposition Here we are. With more than databases. 200 NoSQL NoSQL systems haven’t remained simple key-value stores with get/set, map/reduce operations. MongoDB added an aggregation a modern , and dropped . framework, storage engine ACID DynamoDB added , , and now a SQL-like language. Cassandra started with , an SQL-like language, made significant changes with 3.0, and has been adding new datatypes, DDLs and DMLs. transactions indexes CQL Couchbase started with , added . In 2015, Couchbase introduced -- SQL for JSON, global secondary , with N1QL support, and distributed . simple APIs views N1QL indexes and later added analytical service transactions If you’re read , it should remind you of the and the stories. Incumbents left the low end of the market to Toyota Corona and mini mills which freed them to focus on higher margin markets. The Innovator’s Dilemma Toyota mini mills In the database industry, the Incumbents regarded NoSQL with the same or claimed they had SQL-less databases a long time ago! Still, there have been some half-hearted attempts by the incumbents to get into the market. derision Oracle even invested in NoSQL by buying , maker of the BerkeleyDB NoSQL database. IBM added JSON and MongoDB support to and . Sleepycat Software Informix DB2 This is the equivalent of GM releasing the -- let’s release a basic model at the lower end of the market and be done with it. Microsoft probably made the best attempt by building (formerly DocumentDB) from the ground up. Geo Metro CosmosDB NoSQL isn’t simply the absence of SQL. Just like Toyota and mini mills, NoSQL has the core strengths. Toyota’s strength was the single-mold frame which enabled them to produce the car in Japan, ship it 6000 miles and still be affordable for the low end of the car buyers. The single-mold frame also provided them the base to iterate and innovate to improve the car. Mini mills continue to move up the stack to produce better quality steel and the integrated steel mills usually responded by fleeing the market and avoiding competition. One fine day, GM filed bankruptcy and the integrated steel mills went out of business. So, what is the core differentiator of NoSQL? Distributed database from the core. Traditional RDBMS systems were built to run on a single machine and extended for hot-standby situations and then stretched for scale. NoSQL systems are designed to run on a cluster of machines from the get go. Hardware and software failures are expected and handled at a systemic level. In fact, COUCH in COUCHBASE stands for Cluster Of Unreliable Commodity Hardware. The core of NoSQL starts with a distributed database providing reliability and scale-out. Sure, there have been distributed database systems for 40 years. They focused on warehousing, not OLTP. NoSQL started with the measly get()/set() APIs: just enough to cover the basic use cases with shopping carts, session stores, and profile managers. There was no way that their functionality could match the sophistication of SQL. The mockery of NoSQL from the traditional database vendors is of the response from GM and integrated steel mills. The “high priests” of Oracle and IBM were happy to seed this low end market to a bunch of “know nothings.” reminiscent NoSQL databases have since added indexes, SQL with joins, aggregates, window functions, search and transactions. OK. This is just Couchbase. But, others have some of these. At Couchbase, we work with customers migrating off Oracle, Db2, Informix, SQL Server, and Sybase. These are great databases, but their core is different. Built for one, extended for a few. NoSQL systems are built for massive scale and reliability. Even when the higher-level index, query, and search capabilities are added, this core still has to operate at scale and be reliable. With all these capabilities, NoSQL has become the mainstay in the enterprises. and thousands of clusters routinely run , , , and other NoSQL systems. Mission-critical workloads Couchbase MongoDB Elastic NoSQL systems have made the modern database ready and affordable for modern enterprises. SQL itself has been . Many to support many aspects of SQL. The competition between the NoSQL systems to provide better SQL -- which means better syntax, functionality, performance, optimizer, and scale -- is fierce. unreasonably effective NoSQL systems have been extended As these systems grow to create an even better database, let’s welcome Amazon DynamoDB to the fold and say: . NoSQL is dead, long live NoSQL References https://www.allthingsdistributed.com/files/amazon-dynamo-sosp2007.pdf https://dzone.com/articles/keep-calm-and-query-json https://dzone.com/articles/keep-calm-and-json https://cassandra.apache.org/doc/latest/architecture/overview.html https://hostingdata.co.uk/nosql-database/ http://www.vldb.org/pvldb/vol2/vldb09-938.pdf https://www.singlestore.com/blog/why-nosql-databases-wrong-tool-for-modern-application/ https://blog.couchbase.com/unreasonable-effectiveness-of-sql/ https://blog.couchbase.com/the-unreasonable-effectiveness-of-sql-in-nosql-databases/

Maker

Amazon

Apache

BUNCH

Facebook

Google

Microsoft

Oracle

Read My Stories

Too Long; Didn't Read

Developers: Build Less. Deliver More. [Learn how]	

NoSQL: A Brief History and the DynamoDB Challenge

NoSQL: A Brief History and the DynamoDB Challenge

Too Long; Didn't Read

Companies Mentioned

Coin Mentioned

Couchbase

About Author

TOPICS

THIS ARTICLE WAS FEATURED IN...

NoSQL: A Brief History and the DynamoDB Challenge

Too Long; Didn't Read

Companies Mentioned

Coin Mentioned

Couchbase

About Author

TOPICS

THIS ARTICLE WAS FEATURED IN...

RELATED STORIES