The Oracle-SimpleDB Hybrid Part 3 : Defining the SimpleDB-Oracle translation
Preamble : See Part 2 : Solving the Eventual-Consistency Problem
When building a SimpleDB-Oracle (i.e. any key_value_store-RDBMS) hybrid system, translating between two very different data models presents a challenge. The challenge expands beyond the obvious ACID vs. BASE differences.
Most RDBMSs support the following features:
- Triggers
- Stored Procedures
- Constraints (e.g. integrity, foreign key, unique, etc…)
- Sequences
- Sequences used as Primary Keys
- Locks
- Tables without Primary Keys or Unique Keys or both
- Relationships between tables
Read More
The Oracle-SimpleDB Hybrid Part 2 : Solving the Eventual Consistency Problem
Preamble: Read Part 1: Pulling Data out of Oracle Efficiently
Creating the Oracle-SimpleDB Hybrid system is a challenge. For one, it is a multihomed system, accepting writes in both the cloud (i.e. SimpleDB) and in our data center (i.e. Oracle). Secondly, the data center and the AWS reqion (i.e. US-east) are on opposite coasts of the US with network latency ~50-100ms. Thirdly, clocks are not synchronized via network protocols like NTP across WANs. NTP across WANs introduce tens of milliseconds of inaccuracy, which may not be good enough to resolve all forms of conflict.
To build a multi-homed system, we needed to keep our Oracle DB in our data center in sync with our SimpleDB domains in the East Coast region.
This is a tough problem to solve. How consistent do we want the data? What if we shoot for strong-consistency?
In order to build a strongly-consistent link between Oracle and SimpleDB, we could use dual-writes via a 2 Phase Commit (a.k.a 2PC) protocol. However, 2PC over a 50-100ms link would be an availability bottleneck, and hence 2PC is not a viable option. Any consensus protocol would suffer the same short-coming.
Since we cannot achieve Strong Consistency between Oracle and SimpleDB, can we achieve Eventual Consistency?
Read More
RDBMS vs SimpleDB Overview
Enter the key-value store, exit the RDBMS
Anyone who has worked directly or indirectly with a relational database will tell you that it would be foolish to build a business that didn’t use one to store your business’s data.
One may argue whether MySQL or Oracle is the better choice, but would someone actually argue that an RDBMS (a.k.a. relation database) was not the best choice for storing your data?
Yes! There is a movement, the NoSQL movement, that is challenging the supremacy of RDBMSs for storing your data!
Some are listed here
Now 10 years after Eric Brewer’s game-changing introduction of the CAP theorem, a mass exodus is starting towards AP (availability + partition tolerance) and away from CP (strong consistency + partition tolerance).
Amazon’s SimpleDB is one such alternative to an RDBMS. Simply put, it is a distributed, replicated, eventually-consistent, always-available, key-value store owned and operated (i.e. hosted) by Amazon’s Web Services division.
Read More
nosql
sharadag
boredandroid