My company has been used Oracle for a long time but we would like to look for a NoSQL database as a replacement for faster querying and flexible schema design.
I have tried to use MongoDB which would be the most popular NoSQL database nowadays. I connected it to Spring Data to do some simple queries, which is quite easy to be set up and code simply. Since we are using Spring MVC for web development, Spring Data seems quite suitable for integration.
However, I heard that Cassandra would have better performance in write and read, especially in large scaling system. I am not sure whether it is worth to move to Cassandra and not sure how to measure the performance between MongoDB and Cassandra.
Here are some requirements for my system:
focusing on article fetching
tagging for articles for users to easily search for their favors or related articles
non-distributed system, but have load-balancing and fail-over
Java based, Spring MVC for web development
articles would be stored as XML
probably provide user-defined tables (collections) and fields (keys)
Therefore I would like to raise some questions:
Which Database is the most suitable for my case? You may also raise other databases apart from MongoDB and Cassandra.
If I use Cassandra, which framework would be suitable for integrating to Spring MVC?
Thank you so much in advanced.
I have experience using Spring and Cassandra together. But I always have written my own data access layer.
Using the ORMs out there for Cassandra will not allow you to leverage its full power, and you will, most likely, introduce bugs because your SQL background will make you expect certain behaviours that are just not what Cassandra will give you.
My advice write the code that will access Cassandra yourself and do not be afraid to denormalize A LOT. Think more about how you want to query (or find it) your data than the format in which you want to save it.
I also strongly recommend reading this amazing article: Cassandra Data Modeling Best Practices part 1 part 2
Another DB which might suit your application better is CouchDB (I like using BigCouch). It is another Document based NoSQL database and is in my opinion superior to MongoDB. It offers better solution for scaling and gives emphasis to Availability (just like Cassandra).
I'd like to point you to this question about the difference between CouchDB and MongoDB.
As far as framework goes Play framework has a lot of plugin to work with NoSQL systems, so you might give it a try. You could try playorm which is the last I experimented on.
EDIT : I forgot to mention Kundera as well as an ORM for Cassandra
Choosing between Cassandra and MongoDB depends on type of storage. MongoDB is primarily for document based storage where you get an edge by having various sql like features.
If you require columnar database with high availability and multi dc replication? go for Cassandra.
http://db-engines.com/en/system/Cassandra%3BHBase%3BMongoDB
Related
I started working on a small POC and decided to give Sails.js a try :)
Part of the POC we wanted to use DynamoDB since the project will eventually involve high scalability and we're not looking to hire full-time MongoDB expert at this point.
We used the module: https://github.com/gadelkareem/sails-dynamodb
Problem is there is no documentation and the module does not even work...
It seems the sails ORM is not ideal for DynamoDB and requires writing custom DB services. Does anyone have experience with this?
I was very excited to come across Sails but if it won't let us play nice with DynamoDB then it might very well be out as an option to us....
Anyone have experience with this or maybe something I'm missing?
One of the important plus of vogels is excellent documentation.
Sails-dynamodb adapter based on the vogels, but not all features are implemented in sails-dynamodb adapter. For example, vogels has Expression Filters.
Vogels able to create tables. Adapter can't. An adapter needs duplication table schema in sails files and dynamodb shell.
Vogels has some own types, such as uuid type, StringSet, NumberSet, TimeUUID. (Adapter can use it too, if includes Vogels and Joi lib)
Vogels and adapter have the same query (create, update, delete, find) capabilities.
Adapter allows without changing the code switch to another data base. Adapter encapsulates establishment of connection to database.
Conclusion - for most purposes this adapter is suitable for the work and do not need to work directly with the Vogels
Sails comes loaded with an ORM called "Waterline". There are some official waterline plugins such as mongodb, postgresql, mysql and then there are some unofficial ones created by the community. I'd assume right now that Dynamo is in the latter category since I have not come across it before. However, with that being said I would not take this experience as a reason to ditch Sails.js.
Sails.js is built with the intention that all of its components can be swapped out, this means you are not tied to a specific template engine, authentication libraries etc. and including your ORM choice.
Waterline is still being actively developed but it is sat at v0.12.1 as of writing this response. It isn't fully there yet so there will be the odd issues still around!
My recommendation? Take a look at swapping out waterline for a different ORM. Keep the flexibility Sails gives you and change out the component that doesn't meet your criteria. There are still many benefits to Sails you can utilise.
Vogels might be worth checking out: https://github.com/ryanfitz/vogels
Turning off waterline: Is there a way to disable waterline and use a different ORM in sails.js?
e-commerce is a product of microsoft.As i gone through the product i came to know that it is mandatory to use SQL server along with e-commerce sever.i want to increase the speed of the retrival process and want to use a NoSQL database like MongoDB in place of SQL.Is that possible? please advice.
No, you can't.
MongoDB can not be used as a drop-in replacement for SQL databases. It already starts with the different and incompatible query language.
But it goes on with them having a completely different way of handling data, which makes it superior in some roles, but inferior in others. Even when you would use some translation-middleware which mimics a SQL server and translates the query commands into the equivalents of the MongoDB database behind it and translates the response back, the performance would likely be a lot worse than with a native MSSQL database, because you would be using MongoDB in a way it wasn't meant to be used.
When you want to use MongoDB successfully, you completely need to change the way you model your data and the way you deal with it. This affects your whole application design. When you try to use MongoDB as if it were a relational database, you will be extremely disappointed.
The same applies to other NoSQL databases.
Also, not every problem is a good fit for every database technology. When it comes to eCommerce applications, you should really think twice before choosing a database technology which doesn't fully guarantee ACID in all situations. Most (not all!) SQL databases do, most (not all!) NoSQL databases don't.
I've been using Geoserver with a postgis datasource but I was thinking of switching over to a NoSQL solution for storing my geospatial data since the schemaless nature of NoSQL databases fits my application well.
However, it seems that most mapping applications that I've come across (geoserver, mapserver) don't have support for NoSQL datastores. The closest thing I've come accross is couchmaps
Has anyone used NoSQL for mapping? If so, what tools have you used? What I'm looking for in particular is an application that can serve WMS and WFS requests using a NoSQL datastore.
for GIS data and Search in Nosql MongoDB is suitable for you because mongodb itself provide facility to store and search for GIS data.
read more at here
I am interested in the same issue, and it seems that GeoServer is ready to work with MongoDB as seen in http://www.mongodb.com/presentations/mongodb-geoserver.
I hope this could help you too, http://boundlessgeo.com/2014/06/mapping-worldcup-opengeo-suite-mongodb/ . It explains how to configure the connection between GeoServer + MongoDB and how to add a layer using geotweets as source information.
I want to write a high scalable web application for selling event tickets. I want to use NoSQL database, like Big Table or MongoDB and Cloud Service like Google App Engine (GAE) or Amazon Elastic Compute Cloud (Amazon EC2)
Is it posible using this type of database to be sure that two client will not be able to buy a ticket for the same place simultaneously? Or may be I will have to use RDBMS database and forget about Google App Engine?
Things like GAE's datastore can still support transactional semantics, for example:
http://code.google.com/appengine/docs/python/datastore/transactions.html
So yes, it is possible to do what you're seeking to do. (Note - GAE's Datastore is not exactly NoSQL, since it uses SQL-like queries.)
I have a problem with this question. Not all NoSQL databases are created equally, and different NoSQL databases have different ways they store data. Generally the thing you should be worried about are: data is actually written to disk and not just into memory. Most NoSQL databases can do this but not by default. Let's just say this is not a problem, you can usually tell the database like MOngo or Cassandra to write data to disk, can even tell how many servers at minimum the data should be written to.
The problem is that you may not get a true transactional support. When you deal with ecommerce it's important to have all or nothing type of transation where several operations either succeed completely or rolled back. There must be absolutely no chance that only part of your data is saved. For example, if you need to write data to more than one table (collection or document in NoSQL lingo), if server goes down in the middle of the process and your data is only written to one table, that's usually unacceptable in ecommerce.
I am not familiar with all NoSQL databases, but the ones I know don't have this option yet.
MySQL, on the other hand, does.
If transactional support or lack of it does not bother you, then I think its OK to use NoSQL as long as you tell it to save data to disk and not just into memory.
The answer is 'maybe.'
Depending on what you're trying to build, you many be able to use some of the techniques in this post:
http://kylebanker.com/blog/2010/06/07/mongodb-inventory-transactions/
Using something like get_or_insert you can easily ensure that two clients are not receiving the same resource simultaneously on Google App Engine. However, there are big differences between GAE and a RDBMS, so make sure you study them further before you make a decision.
It's obvious that I'm not an expert on Cassandra. So the question may sound silly.
Given an existing SQL-based project does it give any benefit or is it even possible to apply a no-SQL database(e.g. Cassandra) as an additional layer between business logic and SQL database to speed up our queries or inserts.
It's relatively new technology and I'm trying to find its place.
Cassandra will work fine, but if you don't care if you have to rebuild your data memcached will be faster.
But if you want a persistent cache, Cassandra is probably your best option -- reddit started by using Cassandra like this and is working on moving more functionality to it.
I would go with Windows Server AppFabric aka Velocity distributed cache with SQL Server, assuming you are on the .NET platform.
Scott Hanselman has a bunch of posts on AppFabric.