Yep, great examples, and also _extremely_ unique examples. Most of us
will not be building a Facebook any time soon. Hence my argument that
relational dbs are here to stay for a while. Just because they don't
work for Facebook doesn't mean it won't work for the 99.99% of the
rest of us. ;) Just like your argument about cars. Yes they could be
build better - I'm sure the standard tank is a lot better than a car -
but it isn't cost efficient or practical for the majority of us.

On Sat, Nov 28, 2009 at 6:45 PM, Zaphod Beeblebrox
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
> facebook.
> amazon s3
> most cloud computing db's
>
>
>
> On Nov 28, 2009, at 6:23 PM, Vivec wrote:
>
>>
>> hmm...realies?
>> What are all these applications that don't use relational databases to
>> handle large volumes of data?
>>
>> 2009/11/28 Raymond Camden <[email protected]>:
>>>> The newer apps I've been seeing are relying less on relational databases 
>>>> for their storage so querying a recordset becomes less important.
>>>
>>> Sure - because not every app needs a relational database. I think it
>>> would be foolish to assume so - just as it is foolish to assume
>>> objects should be used everywhere
>>
>>
>
> 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Want to reach the ColdFusion community with something they want? Let them know 
on the House of Fusion mailing lists
Archive: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:308639
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm
Unsubscribe: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.5

Reply via email to