Relational databases have enjoyed a long run as the database mainstay across a wide variety of businesses, and for good reasons. They're relatively easy to create and use, and they offer reliable performance in both transaction processing and business intelligence applications, with support for transaction and data integrity. However, relational databases haven't necessarily adapted well to changes in the types and quantities of data now being generated, such as the unstructured data that is prevalent in big data applications. In addition, expanding traditional databases to accommodate rapid growth is costly.
As a result, NoSQL database technologies are challenging the monopoly of the relational database management system. There are a number of NoSQL database options, all developed to fulfill particular purposes that RDBMSs aren't designed to handle. Many organizations are finding new freedom in having so many choices when it comes to database architectures. Yet, despite their modern designs and efficiency in managing large data sets, NoSQL databases aren't the right fit for all projects -- and they aren't likely to oust relational software from the top database perch any time soon.
Depending on your business goals, traditional databases, NoSQL databases or a hybrid of the two may be best to deliver the most value. The articles and videos in this guide examine these technologies from different perspectives and explore the case for the ongoing relevance of relational databases.
Relational technology still rules database roost
Large Internet companies like Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn and Netflix are well-known users of NoSQL database technology, as it works well with the large data sets they need to manage. However, many organizations find that traditional databases are still best for their business needs. In this section, learn how relational database technologies are holding their own in the database world by evolving to meet higher levels of efficiency as well as specific business needs for various companies -- even Facebook.
While new database technologies offer sleek designs and the promise of fast performance, for many companies a relational database management system is still best for business. Continue Reading
Learn how Facebook uses a combination of Hadoop for exploratory analysis and relational databases for operational analysis, including data slicing and dicing. Continue Reading
Leading RDBMS makers are increasing the efficiency of analytical and operational processing by bringing in-memory traits to their flagship offerings. Continue Reading
During the relational database design and deployment rush, don't neglect to complete a thorough requirements gathering process, says author Michael J. Hernandez. Continue Reading
Microsoft's SQL Server 2014 database features an in-memory engine that boosts processing speeds and support for hybrid cloud environments. Continue Reading
Oracle has joined the in-memory rush, adding an optional engine for processing data in memory to its flagship relational database. Continue Reading
This article examines whether IBM's DB2 database is catching up to upstart analytics engines, highlighting the experience of railroad company BNSF. Continue Reading
While some application developers have moved on to other options, traditional SQL databases are still the best choice for most projects, says consultant Tim O'Brien. Continue Reading
NoSQL software chips away at RDBMS dominance
While myriad NoSQL database options have emerged to help businesses address big data requirements and scalability concerns, they aren't full replacements for traditional databases. Some companies are choosing NoSQL systems to support big data applications in completely non-relational environments, but others are combining them with a relational database management system or data warehouse -- an approach that illustrates the frequent use of NoSQL to mean "not only SQL." The articles in this section examine the varied roles of NoSQL technologies and how they relate to mainstream relational databases.
NoSQL software has bit into the relational database monopoly, but even NoSQL users typically are still attached to SQL technology as well. Continue Reading
With so many choices in the NoSQL product market, prospective users have their work cut out for them when it comes to comparing and sorting the options. Continue Reading
Consultant Mark Whitehorn says that unstructured data is often better managed by NoSQL software than by table-centric relational databases. Continue Reading
As more and more companies look to use NoSQL databases to manage big data, it's useful to compare the security features of NoSQL and RDBMS technologies. Continue Reading
Read about how organizations can combine NoSQL database architectures with conventional databases to realize new business value. Continue Reading
Experts talk RDBMS, NoSQL and big data
In this section, consultants and other speakers offer insight and advice on topics including the choice between relational and NoSQL databases, using Oracle databases in the big data era and building mixed data management architectures in the age of big data.
Consultant William McKnight explains how both NoSQL and relational databases have a place in most IT architectures.
NoSQL databases are less expensive and more scalable, but Oracle's relational databases are more secure in terms of data-loss risk, according to Oracle user John Kanagaraj.
William McKnight offers design and deployment tips for assembling information architectures in the big data era.
Learn about key trends in managing big data and find out about adoption rates for Hadoop clusters and NoSQL databases from consultant John Myers.
Get information on how NoSQL technologies work, and advice on deploying them, from Max Schireson, CEO of vendor MongoDB.
These definitions help clarify the distinctions among various database systems.
Quiz yourself on RDBMS and NoSQL
Take this brief quiz to test your knowledge of relational databases and NoSQL technologies.Take This Quiz