Re: Is a RDBMS needed?

Any technology is potentially useful under certain circumstances.

I'd be asking the bigger 'how does this fit in our organization' questions:
- do we have the skills to support it?  How 'spensive to get 'em?
- what is the backup/recovery strategy and has it been proven?
- what are the manageability capabilities?
- how scalable is it? (proof needed, not just a bit-head's assertion)
- are there references?

Sounds like the management would deem this to be a mission critical app. So I'd like some proof that the content management is robust.

As a fellow dinosaur, I think you are correct in raising the questions. Get someone with experience in the technology to provide trustworthy answers. ;-)

/Hans

On 09/06/2011 9:22 AM, Blake Wilson wrote:
Here at the University of Western Ontario we are looking at replacing our current Learning Management System. The current choices seem to be similar in technology and infrastructure - web tier, load balancer, application tier, back end RDBMS and some sort of content management system for the course content.

However, the next release of one of our options will not have a RDBMS in the solution. It will be replaced by Apache Jackrabbit. The new system will have everything// treated as content, including grades, test questions and answers, discussion threads, syllabi, personal profiles, chat messages, and so on.

This seems like quite a departure from normal RDBMS based solutions. Is this a good idea? Am I being a dinosaur by thinking that this is not a good idea? Do I need to keep up with the times? Is this the future of databases? This really looks to me like a return to design of 20 years ago.

Thanks,
Blake Wilson

Other related posts: