The Problem with the Term NoSQL and Document DBs

ByPrimary Researcher

Executive Summary

  • NoSQL was created as a term to describe non-relational databases.
  • We cover the problems with this term.

Introduction

NoSQL has become the common term to describe non-relational databases.

The Problem

However, NoSQL does not mean NoSQL, but “Not Just SQL.”

Well, those guys who thought that “NoSQL” was a good representation of the meaning “Not only SQL” need to brush up on semantics. No SQL is exclusionary. Its literal interpretation is there will be no SQL. SQL and More would have been better. But the naming should have been based upon the storage difference, I think. Or perhaps non-relational?

But that is not true, either!

Another explanation for NoSQL is that it schema-less, but that is also not true. It would help if you had relations, but they are different.

“However, while document databases don’t require the same predefined structure as a relational database, that doesn’t mean that they don’t support it. In fact, MongoDB allows relationships between documents to be modeled via Embedded and Referenced approaches.”

A Proper Name for Document Databases

So maybe Easily Adjustable Schema and Hierarchical Document Databases? EASHDD?

NoSQL databases are permutated. In the beginning, the emphasis was to minimize SQL — but that that changed as it became impractical, and they had to do SQL. So now the name is a problem.

Go to top

Conclusion

The inaccurate term of NoSQL will negatively impact the development of the market for what are non-relational databases. This is because it focuses on the API to the database rather than what actually separates the databases from the database RDBMS type.

References

https://insights.stackoverflow.com/survey/2019#technology