concept share - nothing architecture in category nosql

This is an excerpt from Manning's book Making Sense of NoSQL. Login to get full access to this book.

Of the three alternatives, a shared-nothing architecture is most cost effective in terms of cost per processor when you’re using commodity hardware. As we continue, you’ll see how each of these architectures works to solve big data problems with different types of data.

Of the architectural data patterns we’ve discussed so far (row store, key-value store, graph store, document store, and Bigtable store), only two (key-value store and document store) lend themselves to cache-friendliness. Bigtable stores scale well on shared-nothing architectures because their row-column identifiers are similar to key-value stores. But row stores and graph stores aren’t cache-friendly since they don’t allow a large BLOB to be referenced by a short key that can be stored in the cache.