お知らせ：０７６はゲーム開発スタジオとなる為、４月２日をもって０７６萌ＳＮＳ及び０７６萌Mitraのサービスを終了致します。諏訪子様は、新しいスタッフ専用のMitraインスタンスで引き続きフォロー出来ます。

これまで０７６萌ＳＮＳ又は０７６萌Mitraをご利用頂き、誠に有難う御座いました。
There are various historical lenses we can apply to the NoSQL movement, from branding (No SQL or Not Only SQL), to goals (scalability vs write availability? vs open source), to operations (should developers or DBAs own the schema? Do should DBAs still exist?), but there was clearly a movement! with at least some set of common goals. In this blog post I'm going to single-mindedly focus on one aspect of NoSQL: scalability. We'll look at some of the things the NoSQL movement threw out, and ask ourselves whether those things actually helped achieve better scalability. On the way, we'll start exploring the laws of scalability physics, and what really matters. So what did NoSQL throw out? Again, that varies from database to database, but it was approximately these things: * Explicit schema * Transactions * Strong consistency * Joins, secondary indexes, unique keys, etc. * The SQL language itself * Data models (graph, etc) - ０７６萌ＳＮＳ