Beyond Relational Databases

CowboyRobot writes "Relational databases were developed in the 1970s as a way of improving the efficiency of complex systems. But modern warehousing of data results in terabytes of information that needs to be organized, and the growing prevalence of mobile devices points to the increasing need for intelligent caching on the local hardware. According to the ACM, the future of database architecture must include more modularity and configuration. Although no concrete solutions are included, the article is a good overview of the problems with modern data systems."

Author's conclusion in case of slashdotting

[Anonymous Coward]

The future will not be found in the relational model, object model, or hybrid, but in the comma-delimited list.

Databases? Bah!

[GillBates0]

Real men work with raw data.

Nothing builds character like manually searching megabytes of raw, unorganized information for a relevent entry. Except maybe sorting it by hand.

Databases are for sissies.

Re:I did not RTFA

[abigor]

Yeah, for those terabytes of data taken up by your mom's recipes and your cd collection, the extreme power of PHP and MySql is all you need, man.

Re:KISS (I can prove SQL will be around)

[gosand]

SQL, on the other hand:
1) Reasonably simple API
2) Scales to very large databsaes
3) Cross-platform/architecture
4) Performs very well.

I am proof that SQL will be around for a while. When I first saw Unix back in the late 80s, I thought "this is too hard to use, why would anyone need this?" I have been a Unix/Linux user since about '92.

When I took my first SQL class, I thought "these queries are very cumbersome. SQL is stupid." I still use it today.

In '93 I heard about this thing called the World Wide Web, and thought "This is unnecessary. I can find whatever I need on gopher and ftp sites. Why would I want a gui thrown on top of it?"

As you can see, I am quite the visionary.

Bah...

[Danathar]

ASCII Flat files are the way to go. If I can't fgrep it...then to hell with it. SQL my ass..

Re:Databases? Bah!

[The Angry Mick]

Nothing builds character like manually searching megabytes of raw, unorganized information for a relevent entry. Except maybe sorting it by hand.

True, but eventually, you have to give in to the need for less complexity - after all, there's only so many hours in a day.

Now I keep all my "1"'s and "0"'s in two separate containers. This makes it tremendously easy to find exactly what I looking for . . .

Re:Databases? Bah!

[temojen]

As are filesystems. "Real men" grep their block devices for magic numbers like "ReIsEr34" when looking for the start of their data.

Re:Databases? Bah!

[shish]

Nothing builds character like manually searching megabytes of raw, unorganized information for a relevent entry

Wow, someone who likes slashdot's search feature :o

Re:5th normal form model of perfection.

[orderb13]

I actually once asked a Terradata consultant what the 4+ normal forms were used for. His response was "So high priced consultants can finish out their contract without actually having to do anything."

Another one?

[ColdWetDog]

I've already got Windows and a girlfriend, I really don't need another irrational database.