This has been asked on occasion in the past but like all things, database preference/technology changes quickly. Let's see what people are using today.
If you think I've left out an important one, leave a comment and I will try and edit the post.
There's no good reason to start a project with other databases. If you're worried about the scalability of something like MySQL when you haven't even got your first 1000 users, your priorities are messed up. Finish your product and get your users first. And I hope to god if you DO get your users and I ever have to maintain it, it's not running on some bullshit like Tokyo.
Three reasons: 1) your data is probably relational, even if you think it's not, 2) if you have non-relational records, Postgres has JSON and hash storage types that perform better than most NoSQL databases, and 3) The architecture, standards compliance, and sheer capabilities of Postgres are all best in class. Seriously, if you want to read some good C, peruse the PostgreSQL source. Go Bears.
Unless you're trying to do some analytics (in which case, find a column store), or want to use it and forget it (Amazon's database services; and RDS is Postgres), Postgres is the way to go.
You would never start a journey with cloudy destination and of a million miles by asking for a moon rover as your vehicle. As your journey develops you would start looking at other options or options for certain segments. Apps follow similar patterns.
This tends to be true of all things.
I wouldn't build my MVP on obscure technologies just because they're hip or promise something useful when you have 1M users...
I'd take one person that really groks devops and database internals well enough to make informed choices over a million one-size-fits-all SQL/Mongo+MVC devs. Any day of the week.
Why? Wouldn't it make more sense for startups to color within the lines, in terms of getting features to market faster?
I'd take one person that really groks devops and database internals well enough to make informed choices
Funded or not, a startup has the responsibility to turn every dollar into a feature that creates revenue, not architecture.
I strongly disagree with the notion that any practicing or aspiring creator should refuse to learn about and consider the full range of tools at their disposal, simply because there's a popular default choice.
Specialized tools provide a form of leverage to those who understand and employ them wisely. Every problem I have ever come across that is sufficiently difficult and interesting to warrant forming a startup requires deeper insight on a technical level than "just ignore everything else and use X".
Can you imagine if the founders of Google took this kind of advice?
As a couple of examples, Google started on clusters of relatively commodity hardware. For years, AdWords ran on MySQL. Google's advantage wasn't in the innovative architecture, but rather, in the PageRank logic, which led to leadership in other areas. The architecture supports the innovation, which is the competitive advantage; the architecture isn't the competitive advantage.
575 PostgreSQL
462 MySQL
275 Redis
201 MongoDB
184 Microsoft SQL Server
144 SQLite
124 Memcached
122 ElasticSearch
100 Oracle
80 The File System
66 MariaDB
57 Cassandra
44 Other
41 Amazon DynamoDB
24 Riak
23 CouchBase (Couch, Membase included)
23 DB2
20 Neo4j
19 Custom
18 BigTable
16 LevelDB
14 HBase
14 RethinkDB
12 Firebase
11 Amazon SimpleDB
9 RavenDB
9 Vertica
8 Datomic
7 Tokyo
5 Teradata
5 Firebird
5 Informix
2 VoltDB
2 Netezza
var res = [], arr = document.querySelectorAll('table')[3].childNodes[0].childNodes;
for (var i = 0; i < arr.length; i+=3) {
res.push({name: arr[i].innerText.replace(/\n/,''), points: parseInt(arr[i+1].innerText,10)})
};
res.sort(function(a,b){return (0+b.points > 0+a.points) ? 1: -1 }).forEach(function(i){console.log(i.points, i.name)})If you are going to have column stores, you should have InfiniDB.
And if you are going to have SQLite, you should also list MS SQL Server Compact. MS Access is also a viable option, also DBase and Filemaker.
Clustrix and NuoDB should also be in the list if you are listing NewSQL systems like VoltDB.
I am sure there are others :S as a DBA would be interested what businesses or systems only back onto column stores without a traditional RDBMS or a modern NoACID system.
Are people voting for it because they use redis as their primary data store, or just because they use it at all?
I use it redis a cache and I haven't voted for it because I assume this poll is asking about the primary data store. Does anyone use redis as their main db?
https://mariadb.com/kb/en/distributions-which-include-mariad...
If you thought you were using MySQL, check your package repository!
I guess I work at a big company. Our big data team is dealing with HBase and Vertica, our game team is dealing with mysql, our web team migrates a redis into couchdb, my team deals with mysqldb, neo4j, cassandra and sqlite on a test server where no one wants to set something proper up. Memcached and the file system is working on most services it makes sense on.
* Postgres (including RDS), Oracle, and MariaDB all used as transactional stores on projects of varying vintage
* Vertica for aggregate reporting
* Hadoop/HBase in another data warehouse
* Mongo in several key-value stores
* Amazon DynamoDB under evaluation for likely adoption for a newer key-value store
* memcached ubiquitous
* SQLite for simple read-only stores within web services
* Cassandra and Redis under evaluation for task queue result stores
In a large, mature organization, I think this kind of heterogeneity is both inevitable and appropriate.
I've found that to be true time and time again. With other systems it's easy to quickly paint yourself into a corner, with postgres it's fairly straightforward to move to another system, e.g. cassandra/mongo/couch/etc (that's IF you actually ever need to move from postgres)
Ideally when you hadn't voted, the ordering would be random.
The options towards the bottom of the list may not get as much attention and votes even if they are used by people.
If it were alphabetical, people might hunt and peck for the one they use most, e.g. PostgreSQL, they might then see things around there (memcached) but fail to scroll back up and vote for Custom too.
Random deals with it well enough without even knowing the poll content or number of options.
Currently evaluating ElasticSearch and it looks really promising also. We may move over to it as it seems to have a bit more momentum and better support for cloud/scaling.
It's a recent poll about favorite relational database and Postgres came first by far.
But at home and for personal projects i use postgresql + it's advanced features. So voted for both.
A bit of a lengthy read, but worth it.
In CAP theorem they are CP.