NYCPHP Meetup

[Adam Fields]

On Tue, Jan 18, 2005 at 07:42:26PM -0500, inforequest wrote:
[...]
> "Relational databases are one to two orders of magnitude too slow," says 
> Stonebraker, who is chief technology officer at Streambase, a 25-person 
> outfit based in Lexington, Mass. "Big customers have already tried to 
> use relational databases for streaming data and dismissed them. Those 
> products are non-starters in this market."
[...]

This is not news. Relational databases are widely known to be slow,
which is why you have throw things like Oracle at the problem before
you get anything close to realtime analytics, and even they fall down
a lot. Relational databases, however, are mature and stable. This
doesn't sound like an alternative to a relational database, but a
complement - you still have to store the data somewhere.

I wonder if they've done speed comparisons vs. a relational database
that's entirely in memory (or properly tuned). Technique alteration is
one thing, but just saying "the whole thing's in RAM" isn't a
revolution.


-- 
				- Adam

-----
** Internet users who enjoyed this email also clicked on
     this link to my weblog --> http://www.aquick.org/blog
[ http://www.adamfields.com ][ http://del.icio.us/fields ]
[ http://www.aquick.org/photoblog ]