Indexing, joins, storage…everything has to be rebuilt from the ground up, and a lot of assumptions have to change.

At Drawn to Scale, we’ve built a real-time SQL database on top of Hadoop and HBase. Customers are using it now, even in beta — so there’s a definite need for SQL out there still.

Amazon’s NoSQL database is the fastest growing service they’ve ever launched.

I have noticed that much of the reporting coming out of the Structure conference is along the same lines as this article. Flimsy context setting, panelist quote, conflicting panelist quote, erroneous assertion about the technology, closing statement along the lines of, “This sure is a big problem.”

I’m very disappointed by this “article”. Normally articles on Gigaom demonstrate some level of understanding of the technologies that are behind the article. But this was just 3 quotes from people at different companies surrounded by a small pile of fluff.

Instead of simply saying “SQL is terrible” and leaving it at that, why not offer some context about problems of structured and unstructured data?

Instead of misidentifying the problem of using Mongo for a bank account as one of stability, how about correctly understanding issues like ACID compliance versus eventual consistency?

As for NUODB, instead of just quoting the aspirational goal of the CEO of the company, how about a little insight into how their product is attempting to explain the architectural approach and how it will help NUODB meet those aspirations?

As a practitioner in the field, I understand how hot big data and analytics are. And while it makes sense for Gigaom to write articles that will draw traffic, putting fluff out like this will only make the traffic you have go elsewhere.

I mean, you’re the one who started this article off with: “Everybody likes a good technology debate”