Term #NOSQL (Not Only SQL) props up frequently these days, sometimes rivalling the traditional SQL-based datastores and on a few occasions augmenting it.
Both of these categories of datastores (databases) are no doubt quite different from each other, have different philosophies behind their implementation and most importantly, have different vendors.
Why don't the conventional SQL-based vendors grasp this opportunity and acquire another paradigm support under their belt? Although Oracle, a RDBMS vendor speaks up of supporting map-reduce model (a feature that is associated with NOSQL solutions), it however does not gives explicit constructs of endorsing the feature.
On the other hand, the NOSQL counterparts are emerging one after the other, solutions made in different languages, with slight variations. It seems like these NOSQL advocates turned vendors are trying to make the most of a hole found in the datastore market, and why shouldn't they capitalize on this silver opportunity? RDBMS vendors have left no room for the different DBMS paradigms to grow, and some of them have evolved into immense beasts.
It will be interesting to see how the different vendors, new and established ones will react to the new demands posed by the NOSQL movement. Only time will determine the leading marketshare holder for this new trend in data storage.
