Aggregation - MapReduce vs SQL?

As a long-term SQL guy, I find that coding set-based SQL queries, even with SQL ugliness, to be easier than coding Map/Reduce, which admittedly I am just learning. There are decades of experience built into relational databases that optimize these actions.

As a long-term SQL guy, I find that coding set-based SQL queries, even with SQL ugliness, to be easier than coding Map/Reduce, which admittedly I am just learning. There are decades of experience built into relational databases that optimize these actions. The line for me in choosing NoSQL comes when the data is much more document-oriented, and tends to reduce to lots of attributes to documents, and when the read/write ratio is highly skewed to reads.In these cases I'm happy to spend more time coding Map/Reduce functions because of all of that built-in replication and redundancy and simplicity you get in the overall architecture.

I cant really gove you an answer,but what I can give you is a way to a solution, that is you have to find the anglde that you relate to or peaks your interest. A good paper is one that people get drawn into because it reaches them ln some way.As for me WW11 to me, I think of the holocaust and the effect it had on the survivors, their families and those who stood by and did nothing until it was too late.