Where do these solutions have room for improvement? What aspects are already working well?
I'm not familiar with NuoDB, since I work mostly with MS SQL, but it seems that it's main advantage is that it can be scaled very easy:
"In the interest of full disclosure, I work for NuoDB as a technology
evangelist. I have also had very good experiences with SQL Server in the
past. However, I don't think it's necessary to view this posting through
the lens of SQL Server vs. NuoDB. In my opinion it's about selecting the
right tool for the job. NuoDB has introduced a new innovation that enables
developers to build their applications on a single logical database and
scale their database horizontally to handle predictable and unpredictable
spikes in traffic . Horizontal scaling happens completely transparently and
without any changes to the application itself. Feel free to try it for
yourself. We ship with a sample eCommerce application that demonstrates our
capabilities. We also ship with our own ADO.NET driver so you can continue
to use the great tools that come with Visual Studio and SQL Server for
development and reporting."
On the other hand, 2014 has also increased scalability:
"SQL Server 2014 has increased the number of logical processors to 640 and
memory up to 4 TBs."
I can't imagine the company where this won't be enough :)
The hardware is the last option for dealing with performance problems. The
right architecture and database design usually solves all performance
There is so many features in ms sql server, years of studying of the best
developers in the world, still far from perfect but could be used in many
different scenarios. I guess NuoDB is more narrow, oriented to some
specific scenario and for that scenario could be better than MS SQL. As I
say, I'm not familiar with it. But from description it is very positive.
So, it depends on your needs. You must discover your needs and than find if
NuoDB would satisfy them.
And also budget have usually important role.
MySQL has far less features than MSSQL, but it comes with less cost and
since users typically use only 30% of MS SQL features, it could be enough.
So, again, it depends on your needs.
In our company budget for SQL server is not the case, so we decided for MS
SQL, which is overall better(in the way that it covers more scenarios)
product than my sql, probably more comparable with oracle than mysql.
And also important aspect is that your needs could change, and with MS SQL
you are probably on safe side while with my sql you could got stuck.
Sometimes it is better to buy the product which could support the most,
even if many of the features you don't need today.
Every one has its good and its not so good parts. MySQL is suffering from derived queries index usage, but it can simulate variables assignments as in a while/end loop when processing rows. MS SQL cannot simulate loops with conditional variable assignments in statements, but it is optimizing multiple layers of queries.
On the other hand NuoDB is designed for cloud storage/access and on the spot manipulation of configuration, where MS & My can have clusters pre defined and configured, Hadoop is an extension for MySQL to make it work in clusters. MS SQL also supports clusters within a defined group or with extra configuration steps for different cluster groups. All servers support big data but every one has its limitations and it really depends on your functionality requirements. Remember also cloud data are open from everywhere and extra security steps should be planned for compliance and regulations on top of the standard security credentials and filtering which apply to secured physical office placed servers.
SQL Server for big data but MySQL for small data. I support MySQL.
Please check out this link: http://db-engines.com/en/system/Microsoft+SQL+Server%3BMySQL%3BNuoDB