Hacker News Reader

Yes, you are perfectly correct. But a lot of people are paid a lot of money for reinventing the wheel every few years, so expect your words to fall on deaf ears.

I think the question is how much effort will it take to get all kinds of data from all kinds of sources into a nice, coherent schema.

The "schema-less" aspects of NoSQL data stores is a big part of the marketing appeal, I think.

(Maybe the JSON support in PostgreSQL makes this moot, but that's the thinking.)

You always have a schema. The only question is if you know what it is, or not.

In the next few years there will be a lot of money to be made getting data out of these stores and back into relational databases.

PostgreSQL has terrible sharding and clustering support.

So no I would not be using it for any big data projects.

I was going by mcphilip's description which was <300GB. For running data mining on so small datasets you do not need any sharding.

Such general statements can only be inaccurate.

We're having about 3TB of PostgreSQL data on 4 servers. It works very well for us.