您所在的位置： &
NoSQL数据库安全优于RDBMS吗?
NoSQL数据库安全优于RDBMS吗?
Michael Cobb 译者：邹铮
TechTarget中国
NoSQL或者Not Only SQL(不仅仅是SQL)是一种数据存储和检索方法，对于开发交互式Web应用的初创公司和处理大量数据的企业而言，这是非常“时髦”的方法。
NoSQL或者Not Only SQL(不仅仅是SQL)是一种数据存储和检索方法，对于开发交互式Web应用的初创公司和处理大量数据的企业而言，这是非常&时髦&的方法。这种方法受欢迎的主要原因是：与传统关系型数据库管理系统(RDBMS)相比(包括甲骨文的MySQL和微软的SQL Server)，它提供更好的可扩展性和可用性，以及更快的访问数据。
RDBMS中的数据需要是可预测的，因此数据可以存储在有结构的表和行中，通过不同元素之间定义关系。另一方面，NoSQL数据库中的数据则不需要如此结构化或者按照固定的模式。当性能和实时访问比一致性更重要时，例如当索引和检索大量记录时，NoSQL比关系型数据库更适合。在NoSQL中，数据也可以更容易地跨多个服务器存储，因而提供更好的容错性和可扩展性。谷歌和亚马逊等公司是使用自己的云友好型NoSQL数据库技术，现在有很多商业和开源NoSQL数据库可供企业选择，例如Couchbase、MongoDB、Cassandra和Riak。
尽管数据存储在NoSQL数据库中有诸多优点，但快速方便地访问数据的需要严重影响了NoSQL安全。为了安全地存储信息，数据库需要提供保密性、完整性和可用性(CIA)。企业RDBMS数据库通过集成的安全功能提供CIA功能，例如基于角色的安全、加密通信、支持行和列访问控制，以及通过预先设定的程序，用户级权限的访问控制。RDBMS数据库还具有ACID(原子性、一致、隔离、耐用)功能来保证数据库交易的可靠处理;数据复制和日志记录确保耐用和数据完整。由于这些功能增加了检索大量数据所花费的时间，所以它们没有部署在NoSQL数据库中。
为了保证对数据的快速访问，NoSQL数据库基本没有内置安全性。它们有BASE(基本可用、软态、最终一致)的属性;不需要每次传输后的一致性，该数据库只需要最终达到一致状态。例如，当用户查看数据时，比如存储条目的数量，用户会看到数据的最后一次快照，而不是当前视图。因为数据交易没有立即写入到数据库中，同时进行的交易可能会互相干扰。这种固有的争用情况(用户不一定在同一时间看到相同数据)意味着NoSQL数据库永远不会用于处理金融交易。
NoSQL数据库还缺乏保密性和安全性。由于NoSQL数据库没有固定的模式，对表、列或行的权限不能被隔离。这也可能导致相同数据出现多个副本。这会让该数据库很难保持数据的一致性，特别是对多个表格的更改不能包装到一个交易中，因为其插入、升级或删除操作的逻辑单元是作为整体来执行。
现在有超过20种不同的NoSQL部署，缺乏标准也让保持数据安全的更复杂。保密性和完整性必须完全由访问NoSQL数据的应用来提供。对于任何在应用级有价值的数据，只设置最后一道防线并不是正确的做法。应用开发人员并不擅长部署安全功能，新代码通常意味着新漏洞。发送到NoSQL数据库的任何请求都需要进行转义、过滤和验证，而数据库本身需要位于强壮的环境中。
有趣的是，一些NoSQL项目现在开始添加RDBMS类型的安全功能。例如，甲骨文对写入到一个节点的数据增加了事务性控制。Cassandra支持交易记录和自动复制，而MongoDB支持主从复制。
如果可扩展性和可用性是企业对数据库的主要要求，那么，NoSQL可能是某些大型数据集的最佳选择。然而，系统架构师在选择NoSQL数据库之前，应该仔细考虑他们对安全、隐私和数据完整性的需求。缺乏NoSQL安全功能，即身份验证或认证支持，意味着敏感数据最好保存在传统RDBMS中。【编辑推荐】【责任编辑： TEL：（010）】
关于&&&&的更多文章
NoSQL，意即反SQL运动，是一项全新的数据库革命性运动，早期就有
虽然网购有诸多优点，越来越多的人热衷于此，但网购的安全性也逐渐凸显
本专题从以下六个方向对2012年的重大网络安全事件进行
深信服上网行为管理支持丰富的认证模式，能根据用户身
今天的安全威胁越来越多的来自应用层的攻击，有组织的
数据库技术是计算机科学中一个重要的组成部分，它正在以日新月异的速度发展。数据库的基本原理和应用技术已经成为高等院校的学生
51CTO旗下网站nosql跟newsql是什么东西?比之MYSQL怎么
&来源：读书人网&【读书人网()：综合教育门户网站】
nosql跟newsql是什么东西?比之MYSQL如何？有点混乱分不清,今天才看到这两个数据库....说是主要用于web开发？
nosql跟newsql是什么东西?比之MYSQL如何？有点混乱分不清,今天才看到这两个....说是主要用于web开发？[解决办法]Back in January we launched a survey of database users to explore the competitive dynamic between MySQL, NoSQL and NewSQL databases, and to to discover if MySQL usage is really declining C as had been indicated by the results of a prior survey.The publication of the associated report took longer than expected, mostly because we expanded its scope to include revenue and growth estimates for the MySQL ecosystem, NoSQL and NewSQL sectors respectively, and with that report now published I am pleased to fulfil our promise to share the survey results.We seem to be having some random embedding issues so for now the results can be found on SlideShare, adapted from the presentation given at OSBC earlier this week. For greater context, we have also included an explanation of each slide, below:Slide 2: Provides an overview of the associated report C MySQL vs NoSQL and NewSQL , which is available here.Slide 3: Explains why we launched the report. We once described as the crown jewel of the open source database world, since its focus on Web-based applications, its lightweight architecture and fast-read capabilities, and its brand differentiated it from all of the established database vendors and made for a potentially complementary acquisition. Today, the competitive situation is very different.Slide 4: Oracle’s MySQL
faces competition from the rest of the MySQL ecosystem, as illustrated in Slide 5, many of which have emerged following Oracle’s acquisition of Sun/MySQL.Slide 6: The emergence of these alternatives was triggered, in part, by concern about the future of MySQL. A previous 451 survey,conducted in November 2009, showed that there was real concern about the acquisition, with only 17% of MySQL users believing Oracle should be allowed to acquire MySQL.Slide 7: The 2009 survey also showed that while 82.1% of respondents were already using MySQL, that figure was expected to drop to 72.3% by 2014. That survey was conducted amid a climate of fear, uncertainty and doubt regarding the future of MySQL, and one of the drivers for our current report was to see if that predicted decline occurred.Slide 8: To put this in context, we asked the current survey sample (which included 205 database users) about their reaction to the acquisition. While the vast majority of MySQL users reported that they continued to use MySQL where appropriate, 5% indicated that they were more inclined to use MySQL, and 26% said they were less inclined to use MySQL. Not surprisingly the proportion of users less inclined to use MySQL was much higher amongst those abandoning MySQL than those sticking with MySQL.Slide 9: We also asked respondents to rate Oracle’s ownership of MySQL on a range of very good to very bad. Overall, the balance tipped in favour of a negative perception of Oracle’s track record, while there was naturally a more negative perception of Oracle amongst those abandoning MySQL compared to MySQL mainstays. However, the results showed that the percentage of respondents rating the company’s performance ‘very good’ and ‘very bad’ was actually quite similar for both abandoners and mainstays. While those abandoning MySQL are more likely to have a negative perception of Oracle, it is not necessarily safe to assume that Oracle’s actions and strategy are the cause of the abandonment. Clearly there are other competitive forces at work.Slide 10: Not least the emergence of NoSQL, as illustrated in Slide 11, and NewSQL, as illustrated in Slide 12.Slide 13: Based on some very high profile examples of projects migrating from MySQL to NoSQL, there is a common assumption that NoSQL and NewSQL pose a direct, immediate threat to MySQL. We believe the competitive dynamic is more complex.Slide 14: While 49% of those survey respondents abandoning MySQL planned on retaining or adopting NoSQL databases, only 12.7% said they had actually deployed NoSQL databases as a *direct replacement* for MySQL.
Slide 15: In comparison, there is much greater overlap between NewSQL and MySQL, but of a complementary nature. 33% of respondents retaining MySQL had considered, tested or deployed NewSQL database technologies, while approximately 75% of the NewSQL revenue for 2011 is from vendors that we also consider part of the MySQL ecosystem.Slide 16: The results of our 2012 survey show that MySQL is currently the most popular database amongst our survey sample, used by 80.5% of respondents today.Slide 17: However, it’s popularity is again expected to decline to 2014 and 2017. This indicates an accelerated decline in the use of MySQL, compared the findings of our 2009 survey. While that survey was conducted amid a climate of fear, uncertainty and doubt regarding the future of MySQL we are not aware of any specific reason why the 2012 sample, which was self-selecting, should have a disproportionately negative attitude to MySQL or Oracle.Slide 18: MySQL’s predicted decline of 26.4 percentage points between 2012 and 2017 compares to a predicted decline of just 9.3 percentage points for Microsoft SQL Server, and only 5.9 percentage points for Oracle Database. In comparison, MariaDB, Apache Cassandra and Apache CouchDB are expected to increase in usage by 3.0 percentage points or greater between 2011 and 2017.Slide 19: Although alternative MySQL distributions including MariaDB, Drizzle and Percona Server are expected to see increased adoption over the next five years, they are not growing at the same rate that MySQL is declining.Slide 20: So where are those abandoning MySQL going to? Looking specifically at the 55 MySQL users who expect to abandon it by 2017 (which is admittedly a small sample, and therefore not to be considered statistically relevant) we see that PostgreSQL is the most popular database being retained or adopted over the same period, followed by Microsoft SQL Server, Oracle, MongoDB, and MariaDB.Slide 21: This only tells part of the story, however. Just because a company is retaining Oracle Database, for example, does not necessarily mean that Oracle Database is being used as a replacement for the abandoned MySQL. We therefore also specifically asked survey respondents which databases they had considered, tested or deployed as a direct replacement for MySQL. The response from the 55 respondents planning to abandon MySQL again saw PostgreSQL, MariaDB and MongoDB as the most popular answers, followed by Apache CouchDB and Apache HBase.Slide 22: While NoSQL database were well-represented in this list, we saw that anyone considering NoSQL considered multiple NoSQL databases. Per respondent, NoSQL databases were the least considered of all alternatives by existing MySQL users.Slide 23: The survey results suggest that MongoDB is the most often considered, tested or deployed as a replacement or complement for MySQL, followed by Apache CouchDB, Apache HBase, Apache Cassandra/DataStax, and Redis.Slide 24: NewSQL technologies that improve the scalability and performance of MySQL scored well, with eight of the top 10 most considered NewSQL technologies being directly complementing MySQL. Of the other two, one (Drizzle) is a derivative of MySQL, and the other (Clustrix) can also be used in a complementary manner as part of a MySQL cluster, although in the long-term is positioned as a direct alternative.Slide 25: MariaDB is the member of the MySQL ecosystem most often considered, tested or deployed as a replacement or complement for MySQL, followed by Continuent Tungsten, Percona Server, MySQL Cluster, and Amazon RDS.Slide 26: More than half of all MySQL users had considered, tested or deployed another relational database as a direct replacement, while over 40% had considered, tested or deployed a caching technology to complement MySQL. The memcached caching technology was the most widely-deployed of all the technologies we asked about, followed closely by PostgreSQL, which supported anecdotal evidence that a number of MySQL users are migrating to the other major open source transactional database.
Slide 27: For the record, the survey had 205 respondents. Primary job roles among respondents included: director/manager of IT infrastructure (18.0%); architect/engineer (17.6%); developer/programmer (15.6%); database/systems administrator (14.6%); consultant (14.1%); VP level or above (13.7%); analyst (3.4%); and line-of- manager (2.9%).Further survey analysis and perspective on the competitive dynamic between MySQL, NoSQL and NewSQL is available in the MySQL vs NoSQL and NewSQL report, which also includes market sizing and growth predictions for the three segments.NoSQL与NewSQL数据库引航_百度文库
两大类热门资源免费畅读
续费一年阅读会员，立省24元！
NoSQL与NewSQL数据库引航
||文档简介
炼数成金用新兴的社交网站的形式，把各应用...|
总评分0.0|
&&N​o​S​Q​L​ ​是​电​子​商​务​,​社​交​网​站​兴​起​催​生​的​面​向​大​数​据​的​新​兴​解​决​方​案​,​是​对​传​统​关​系​型​数​据​库​的​改​善​,​革​新​和​挑​战​。​N​o​S​Q​L​的​原​意​是​“​N​o​t​ ​O​n​l​y​ ​S​Q​L​”​,​而​非​“​N​o​ ​S​Q​L​”​,​它​并​非​要​彻​底​地​否​定​关​系​型​数​据​库​,​而​是​作​为​传​统​关​系​型​数​据​库​的​有​效​补​充​,​在​特​定​的​场​景​下​能​发​挥​出​难​以​想​象​的​高​效​率​和​高​性​能​。
阅读已结束，如果下载本文需要使用0下载券
想免费下载更多文档？
你可能喜欢