Hello Barry, On Sun, Dec 08, 2013 at 12:03:36PM +0000, Barry Norton wrote: > Actually, I'd go one step further and ask that, since you have a fixed > record-oriented schema and don't need to query a lot of joins as far as I > can see (only foaf:knows?) The foaf:knows relations are not stored in the RDB. >, do you need a relational DBMS even? > Couldn't you easily put the whole record into a NoSQL DBMS or, since you > concentrate on FTS, just index them in Lucene/Solr? Yes - that would be possible and is an option for the future. But we have much more experience with RDBs and the point where we run into scaling problems with the RDB is far away. One feature of a RDB that we currently do not use but that could be useful are transactions: Inconsistencies are improbable but possible as several separate components modify the database simutanously. Avoiding inconsistencies in a NoSQL DBMS is much harder as I recall. Regards, Michael Brunnbauer -- ++ Michael Brunnbauer ++ netEstate GmbH ++ Geisenhausener Straße 11a ++ 81379 München ++ Tel +49 89 32 19 77 80 ++ Fax +49 89 32 19 77 89 ++ E-Mail brunni@netestate.de ++ http://www.netestate.de/ ++ ++ Sitz: München, HRB Nr.142452 (Handelsregister B München) ++ USt-IdNr. DE221033342 ++ Geschäftsführer: Michael Brunnbauer, Franz Brunnbauer ++ Prokurist: Dipl. Kfm. (Univ.) Markus Hendel
Received on Sunday, 8 December 2013 13:14:08 UTC