<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments on: NoSQL: The latest buzzword in Data Science, What is NoSQL? (Day 1)	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://www.dbrnd.com/2016/03/nosql-the-latest-buzzword-in-data-science-what-is-nosql-day-1/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://www.dbrnd.com/2016/03/nosql-the-latest-buzzword-in-data-science-what-is-nosql-day-1/</link>
	<description>BIGData &#124; NoSQL &#124; MSSQL &#124; MySQL &#124; PostgreSQL</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 09 Oct 2017 14:38:36 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=7.0.4</generator>
	<item>
		<title>
		By: Anvesh Patel		</title>
		<link>https://www.dbrnd.com/2016/03/nosql-the-latest-buzzword-in-data-science-what-is-nosql-day-1/#comment-3945</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Anvesh Patel]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 10 Mar 2016 05:08:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.dbrnd.com/?p=1782#comment-3945</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[In reply to &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.dbrnd.com/2016/03/nosql-the-latest-buzzword-in-data-science-what-is-nosql-day-1/#comment-3941&quot;&gt;Jim Nasby&lt;/a&gt;.

Yes Jim, You are right.
But for NoSQL still lots of research and improvement requires in all the direction. 
Not only PostgreSQL, MySQL 5.7 has also now JSON data type to store JSON document into RDBMS. 
This is one of good step by RDBMS products. 
I have recently published, article on PostgreSQL JSON Data type. You should visit this. 
https://www.dbrnd.com/2016/02/postgresql-9-4-the-json-data-type-is-awesome-part-1/]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In reply to <a href="https://www.dbrnd.com/2016/03/nosql-the-latest-buzzword-in-data-science-what-is-nosql-day-1/#comment-3941">Jim Nasby</a>.</p>
<p>Yes Jim, You are right.<br />
But for NoSQL still lots of research and improvement requires in all the direction.<br />
Not only PostgreSQL, MySQL 5.7 has also now JSON data type to store JSON document into RDBMS.<br />
This is one of good step by RDBMS products.<br />
I have recently published, article on PostgreSQL JSON Data type. You should visit this.<br />
<a href="https://www.dbrnd.com/2016/02/postgresql-9-4-the-json-data-type-is-awesome-part-1/" rel="ugc">https://www.dbrnd.com/2016/02/postgresql-9-4-the-json-data-type-is-awesome-part-1/</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Jim Nasby		</title>
		<link>https://www.dbrnd.com/2016/03/nosql-the-latest-buzzword-in-data-science-what-is-nosql-day-1/#comment-3941</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jim Nasby]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 10 Mar 2016 00:22:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.dbrnd.com/?p=1782#comment-3941</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[In many cases, NoSQL is ultimately about trading one difficult problem (High Availability and Scaling an RDBMS) with another difficult problem (re-implementing a bunch of RDBMS features from scratch in your code).

There are a lot of applications that are storing structured data in NoSQL (usually in the form of JSON documents), and often those documents are supposed to conform to an expected structure. The things that RDBMSes were created to do. Frequently you still end up needing things like joins and indexes on top of the JSON. So what you gain in easier administration, you lose in code complexity.

*For many organizations that is still a win.* Developers are much easier to find that DBAs, so if your data quality needs are not that big it can be a good trade-off.

Some databases (like Postgres) have put a lot of work into supporting unstructured data, but they&#039;re still working on things like built-in sharding and HA.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In many cases, NoSQL is ultimately about trading one difficult problem (High Availability and Scaling an RDBMS) with another difficult problem (re-implementing a bunch of RDBMS features from scratch in your code).</p>
<p>There are a lot of applications that are storing structured data in NoSQL (usually in the form of JSON documents), and often those documents are supposed to conform to an expected structure. The things that RDBMSes were created to do. Frequently you still end up needing things like joins and indexes on top of the JSON. So what you gain in easier administration, you lose in code complexity.</p>
<p>*For many organizations that is still a win.* Developers are much easier to find that DBAs, so if your data quality needs are not that big it can be a good trade-off.</p>
<p>Some databases (like Postgres) have put a lot of work into supporting unstructured data, but they&#8217;re still working on things like built-in sharding and HA.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
