W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-wg@w3.org > March 2011

Re: [JSON] beating MongoDB

From: Steve Harris <steve.harris@garlik.com>
Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2011 22:25:34 +0000
Cc: Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>, RDF WG <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <F2D2CF59-864C-44D6-BB24-DC206064467B@garlik.com>
To: Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>
On 2011-03-23, at 17:24, Sandro Hawke wrote:

> [ this is somewhat off-topic, I know. ]
> On Wed, 2011-03-23 at 12:50 -0400, Manu Sporny wrote:
>> Fundamentally, until there is a free, open source, GPLed triple store
>> that is performant, scales to billions of triples and provides an easy
>> to use API - RDF and SPARQL are going to stay roughly as popular as
>> they
>> are right now. Until there is something to replace the 'M' in the LAMP
>> stack for RDF applications, we're not going to see a change in the way
>> Web developers develop.
>> For example, our company needs to store roughly 100 billion+ triples
>> per
>> year of financial transaction data. We're currently using a home-built
>> MySQL solution for our storage mechanism, we will probably migrate to
>> MongoDB in time. We have no free, open source choice for storing this
>> information - nobody does. So the idea that the average web developer
>> is
>> backed by a triple store is a terrible assumption to make. The only
>> thing that even remotely comes close to scaling for us is MongoDB and
>> MongoDB speaks JSON (specifically, BSON).
> I don't think we're likely to beat MongoDB at its own game.  The
> problems it has to solve are somewhat simpler.  If someone just needs a
> closed database backend, and they don't need it to do joins, they can
> and probably should just use MongoDB.     (Or Redis or whatever; I'm
> just using MongoDB as an example non-RDF store because you mentioned it
> and I'm familiar with it.)
> I mean, by all means, they should try one of the faster quadstores [1],
> some of which are open source if they need that, but I wouldn't be at
> all surprised if they preferred MongoDB, and I wouldn't try to talk them
> out of it.  
> Instead, I think the advantages of RDF show up on a different set of a
> problems.  They show up mostly when you need to merge data from multiple
> independent sources.   Once people see that working, they'll see plenty
> of reasons to use RDF.

I couldn't agree more.

- Steve

>   -- Sandro
> [1] http://www4.wiwiss.fu-berlin.de/bizer/BerlinSPARQLBenchmark/

Steve Harris, CTO, Garlik Limited
1-3 Halford Road, Richmond, TW10 6AW, UK
+44 20 8439 8203  http://www.garlik.com/
Registered in England and Wales 535 7233 VAT # 849 0517 11
Registered office: Thames House, Portsmouth Road, Esher, Surrey, KT10 9AD
Received on Thursday, 24 March 2011 22:26:10 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:04:04 UTC