Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Replacing RDBMS

From: "Scott Marlowe" <scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: "T(dot)J(dot) Adami" <adamitj(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Replacing RDBMS
Date: 2007-10-31 18:36:41
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-general
On 10/31/07, T.J. Adami <adamitj(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On 31 out, 11:00, phoenix(dot)ki(dot)(dot)(dot)(at)gmail(dot)com ("Phoenix Kiula") wrote:
> > The Amazon Dynamo framework is going to replace RDBMS?
> >
> >
> This is another idea trying to put down RDBMS. I really think SQL and
> RDBMS still growing up and doing better more and more, specially when
> we talk about large database files and reports.
> Don't worry. PostgreSQL still have a long way forward.

In a way, these articles remind me of the ones I saw a few years back
saying that since MySQL had the ability to do foreign keys, there was
no reason to look at PostgreSQL anymore.  Those articles were clearly
written by people with little to no understanding of the differences
between the two RDBMSs.

The same is true for the authors of these articles.  There are some
things that RDBMSs are great at, and others where they are not the
best choice.  It's not like RDBMSs are likely to replace text files
for everything, and it's not likely that Amazon's fancy new system
will replace RDBMSs for everything either.

In response to

pgsql-general by date

Next:From: Ron St-PierreDate: 2007-10-31 19:22:42
Subject: Re: getting list of tables from command line
Previous:From: Reg Me PleaseDate: 2007-10-31 18:26:51
Subject: Re: Securing stored procedures and triggers

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group