Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 9 years ago.
Improve this question
I am looking for a database engine which is the best for storing thousands of records. I first wanted to use MySQL, because I know it best, but I'd like to have strong answer.
I need predefined columns, database can be as small as 10 MB or as "big" as 10 GB of data and it would be cool if that engine is fast for reads (insertions may be a bit slower). I don't need fast-fulltext-search or regexp searching. To give you an example - selecting items via slug extracted from link.
I saw this site before but I still don't know what is best option for me.
So here is my question: Which database engine is best for uses like mine?
You should look at MEAN stack. Personally, I like MongoDB - I use an ORM tool like mongooseJS - It increases your development speed rapidly. The one thing i really like about having Node JS, Express body parser, mongodb and mongoose is I deal everything on the server side in one language - Javascript and I expose REST services which can be consumed on Web (typically Angular - the A in MEAN stack or backbone) based application.
database can be as small as 10 MB or as "big" as 10 GB of data
At that size, you could use virtually any database you want. Remember, 10 GBs of data is small enough to fit into memory on a modern server.
I need predefined columns...
Sounds like SQL. Take you pick: MySQL, PostgreSQL, SQLite... at that size it will barely matter, just use what you like.
The performance difference on a "few gigs" of data will be negligible.
Look at MongoDB.
And don't forget to look at TokuMX - it's very promising!
Related
Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 5 years ago.
Improve this question
I am curios why some prefer MYSQL over SQLITE, i am interested on learning MYSQL
SQLite is an embedded library, it requires no server process, and everything it saves is contained within a single, portable file. MySQL is an RDBMS server that's a lot more work to set up, but is multi-user, more scalable, and far more featured.
For example, SQLite is used for mobile applications as well as "development" instances of code where it's only lightly loaded. It can be used at scale but generally isn't, its simple design has limitations.
If you're writing a mobile application and need a local database, SQLite is not a bad call. Spinning up a huge, cumbersome MySQL process to do the same thing on a mobile device is a bad plan.
Although they're both "SQL databases" and have a lot of functional overlap, they're engineered to solve some very different problems. In some trivial use cases it might be an arbitrary choice as to which is best, but in most cases it's pretty obvious which of the two you need.
Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 8 years ago.
Improve this question
Please read before you answer: I don't need any opinion-based answers or "nosql vs sql which is better" debates on the subject, just facts.
I want to slowly convert a php+mysql website I wrote with Symfony2 into a real time application using backbone with nodeJs + websockets.
I want to make a slow transition by changing single features, since I don't want to break a fully functional site.
I have been educating myself about NodeJs by reading books and watching Tutorials and there is one thing I noticed, I own more than 5 nodeJs books and none of them use MySql although its fully supported by node.
They all use MongoDB.
Here is my situation
1. My Website is already integrated into MySql(Doctrine)
2. My MySQL setup is fully functional and needs no improvements so far
I'm really frustated and I have a few questions:
Why is MySql not prefered although its a more mature piece of technology?
What are the advantages of moving to MongoDB over MySQL for the purpose of having a real-time application??
I've seen people choose Node/Mongo development because of the simplicity of the all-JavaScript stack, I've seen people choose Mongo because it's the New Hotness, and I've seen people choose Mongo because it's actually the right tool for the job: they have a large amount of document-like, unstructured data and/or they want to take advantage of Mongo's support for horizontal scaling, among other differences between MySQL and Mongo.
I'm not sure it's possible to answer this question in a non-opinion-based manner and without touching on Sql vs NoSql. Mongo is simply a tool, and it happens to be free and commonly used in the field with Node. If I were writing a Node tutorial, I'd probably choose Mongo too, because it's common and it's cool.
If Mongo is the right tool for your site's use cases, then the transition is probably worth it. If MySQL is the right tool for your site, then congratulations! You've just saved a bunch of time rewriting your DB in Mongo.
As an aside- if your question uses the word "preferred", I can't really think of a way for it to not be opinion-based, by definition.
Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 9 years ago.
Improve this question
I'm currently setting up ghost on my server. I will host my own blog and probably some more for my friends.
Ghost uses sqlite per default. Sqlite is good for small applications and development environments.
I plan to run my blog for at least 1 - 2 years or longer if ghost will work out well. A blog contains a lot of images and text. The sqlite db will grow over time with more and more images and so on.
Is it ok to use sqlite for this purpose for several years? MySQL would be much more powerful but also more complex to setup.
What would be the best choice for a Ghost Blog?
Please note that database performance depends not so much on the amount of data (until you run out of local disk space) but on the amount of concurrency.
The SQLite documentation says:
SQLite usually will work great as the database engine for low to medium traffic websites (which is to say, 99.9% of all websites). The amount of web traffic that SQLite can handle depends, of course, on how heavily the website uses its database. Generally speaking, any site that gets fewer than 100K hits/day should work fine with SQLite. The 100K hits/day figure is a conservative estimate, not a hard upper bound. SQLite has been demonstrated to work with 10 times that amount of traffic.
[…]
But if your website is so busy that you are thinking of splitting the database component off onto a separate machine, then you should definitely consider using an enterprise-class client/server database engine instead of SQLite.
Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 9 years ago.
Improve this question
I need to create a database for dealing with click stream (from ~240 subdomains). I use a Java Script for grabbing information like (Host, Page, Date, userID, Referer, HostName, RefererPath, uniqueUserID) for each click and than insert the data to the database through a java web dynamic application. There are about 9 milion new records each day and I have to insert new records every minute. Another application needs to be able to retrieve information about pageviews/unique visitors/ect for a certain article/subdomain in the last (10min, 20min, 30min, 1hour...24 hours). I only need to keep records for the last 3 months.
Initially I thought about using MySQL as I'm only interested in open-source. But I'm thinking about NoSQL solutions. The problem is that I've had experience only with relational databases and am not really able to tell if NoSQL would be a better solution here or not. Also which database should I use if I choose to go wiht NoSQL? and would Key-value store be the best way to go?
I'm guessing this data consistency isn't critical (statistics ?) so you could indeed spare a bit of consistency. NoSQL seems a good choice and a key value store would also be my pick. Now the real question is : what is the most suited one ?
I'd give a consideration to Redis and Riak (which are basically the most well-known ones) :
Riak (AP system) :
Fault-tolerant (masterless with partitioning and replication)
Map reduce
Full text search
BASE
Redis (CP system) :
Really fast
In-memory : You need RAM ! That also means you want replication so you don't lose everything on a crash. Redis also uses disk snapshot I believe.
Master/Slave with reelection
BASE
Both have a lot more features, you should go read the documentation for gotchas. Redis is primarly used as a cache since it's fast, whereas Riak focuses on fault-tolerance. Given your scalability requirements, both can satisfy your need. Therefore you must chose according to what's above.
Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 3 years ago.
Improve this question
I know google uses its own Big Tables (is that right?) and Facebook and Twitter use Cassandra but when does your everyday project outgrow mysql (if ever?)
If you were starting out on a potentially massive scale web application, would you use mysql as an engine or start with an alternative from the start?
I think the only way you can know when MySQL isn't good enough is when you start to see performance issues or you feel like your fighting to keep it going. If you are aware that your application is potentially huge then you should be implementing the right tools from the start otherwise it's a huge headache transferring at a later date.
There is no simple metric which will tell you the answer - it depends not only on the amount of data, number of transactions but also the nature of the replication - number of replicated sites, required speed of replication etc.
Yes, a large scale noSQL clsuter can out-perform a a MySQL cluster built for the same budget for OLTP, however its called noSQL for a reason - when you need to start doing somethng useful with the data, the relational model and SQL language make slicing and dicing the data much easier. OTOH, at some point OLAP then overtakes the relational model in terms of performance - but I think it would be rather difficult to use a datawarehouse for transaction processing.
So its quite possible that the functional requirements of an application will outgrow the capabilities of a noSQL database much faster than the perofrmance requriements would outgrow a relational database.
I'd start with an alternative (PostgreSQL), but not because of scaling issues, but because MySQL's support for transactions and referential integrity is worthless.