a practical guide to noSQL by Denise Mura strikes me as deeply problematic.
First, realize that Denise is describing the requirements that a MarkLogic server is said to meet.
That may or may not be the same as your requirements.
The starting point for evaluating any software, MarkLogic (which I happen to like) or not, must be with your requirements.
I mention this in part because I can think of several organizations and more than one government agency that has bought software that met a vendors requirements, but not their own.
The result was a sale for the vendor but a large software dog that everyone kept tripping over but pride and unwillingness to admit error kept it around for a very long time.
Take for example her claim that MarkLogic deliver[s] real-time updates, search, and retrieval results…. Well, ok, but if I run weekly reports on data that is uploaded on a daily basis, then real-time updates, search, and retrieval results may not be one of my requirements.
You need to start with your requirements (you do have written requirements, yes?) and not those of a vendor or what “everyone else” requires.
The same lesson holds true for construction of a topic map. It is your world view that it needs to reflect.
Second, it can also be used as a lesson in reading closely.
For example, of Lucene, Solr, and Sphinx, Denise says:
Search engines lie to you all the time in ways that are not always obvious because they need to take shortcuts to make performance targets. In other words, they don’t provide for a way to guarantee accuracy.
It isn’t clear from the context what lies Denise thinks we are being told. Or what it would mean to …guarantee accuracy?
I can’t think of any obvious ways that a search engine has ever lied to me, much less any non-obvious ones. (That may be because they are non-obvious.)
There are situations where noSQL, SQL, MarkLogic and topic maps solutions are entirely appropriate. But as a consumer you will need cut through promotional rhetoric to make the choice that is right for you.