The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Comparative Study Between the MySQL Relational Database and the MongoDB NoSQL Database
Abstract
NoSQL databases are new architectures developed to remedy the various weaknesses that have affected relational databases in highly distributed systems such as cloud computing, social networks, electronic commerce. Several companies loyal to traditional relational SQL databases for several decades seek to switch to the new “NoSQL” databases to meet the new requirements related to the change of scale in data volumetry, the load increases, the diversity of types of data handled, and geographic distribution. This paper develops a comparative study in which the authors will evaluate the performance of two databases very widespread in the field: MySQL as a relational database and MongoDB as a NoSQL database. To accomplish this confrontation, this research uses the Yahoo! Cloud Serving Benchmark (YCSB). This contribution is to provide some answers to choose the appropriate database management system for the type of data used and the type of processing performed on that data.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“The downside is that even though its performance stability is 2.5 (reflected in the latency variance and eventual consistency risks of BASE-compliant systems (Matallah et al., 2021))”
From A REVIEW ON OBJECT-ORIENTED, OBJECT-RELATIONAL, RELATIONAL, AND NOSQL DATABASES: EVOLUTION, INTEGRATION, AND PERFORMANCE TRADE-OFFS (2025) · cites this paper as Matallah et al., 2021
In the citing paper
“NoSQL scores lowest at 3/5, providing dynamic typing that improves schema flexibility with a risk of an 8-10% data quality degradation in a deployment with low validation (Matallah et al., 2021).”
From A REVIEW ON OBJECT-ORIENTED, OBJECT-RELATIONAL, RELATIONAL, AND NOSQL DATABASES: EVOLUTION, INTEGRATION, AND PERFORMANCE TRADE-OFFS (2025) · cites this paper as Matallah et al., 2021
In the citing paper
“On the other hand, NoSQL gains (5.0) analogous to schema-less design and multi-model data structures, but at the cost of increased application-side validation burden and lower data quality ratings as much as 8-10% in the worst installations (Matallah et al., 2021).”
From A REVIEW ON OBJECT-ORIENTED, OBJECT-RELATIONAL, RELATIONAL, AND NOSQL DATABASES: EVOLUTION, INTEGRATION, AND PERFORMANCE TRADE-OFFS (2025) · cites this paper as Matallah et al., 2021
Citations
Cited by
Okoronkwo, M. C., Mustapha, M., Markus, C., Adaji, M. A., & Chibunze, N. E. (2025) · Open Journal of Physical Science (ISSN: 2734-2123) · doi:10.52417/ojps.v6i2.1039
Metadata
- Authors
- Matallah, H., Belalem, G., & Bouamrane, K.
- Affiliations
- University of Abou Bekr Belkaïd (DZ)
- Université Oran 1 Ahmed Ben Bella (DZ)
- Venue
- International Journal of Software Science and Computational Intelligence
- Publisher
- IGI Global Scientific Publishing
- Published
- 2021-07-01
- Volume
- 13
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 38-63
- ISSN
- 1942-9037 (ISSN-L)
- 1942-9045
- OpenAlex
- W3172364449
- Cited by
- 46
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 16 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 1
- FWCI
- 4.26
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- ng
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- International Journal of Software Science and Computational Intelligence (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Advanced Database Systems and Queries
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Cloud Computing and Resource Management
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Networks and Communications › Advanced Data Storage Technologies
- Keywords
- MySQL, MongoDB, relational databases, NoSQL databases, database performance comparison, distributed systems, cloud computing
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
