Sharding Concept in depth:- System Design

What is Sharding?

Sharding is a database architecture pattern that involves splitting a large dataset into smaller, more manageable pieces called “shards.” Each shard is an independent database that contains a subset of the overall data. The goal of sharding is to improve scalability, performance, and availability by distributing the database workload across multiple servers.

1. Why Do We Need Sharding?

Sharding is primarily used to address challenges related to scalability and performance in databases that experience high traffic and large datasets. Some of the key reasons for sharding include:

1. Scalability

• Vertical scaling (adding more CPU/RAM to a single machine) has limitations.
• Sharding allows for horizontal scaling by adding more machines.

2. Performance Improvement

• Queries become faster because they run on smaller datasets (each shard contains only a subset of data).
• Reduces contention for system resources (CPU, memory, disk I/O).

3. High Availability & Fault Tolerance

• If one shard fails, only a part of the data is affected, not the entire system.
• It prevents a single point of failure (SPOF).

5. Geographical Distribution

• Data can be stored closer to users in different regions to reduce latency.

2. Where is Sharding Possible?

Sharding is useful in databases where read and write operations are high and dataset size grows rapidly. It is commonly used in:

1. Large-scale web applications

• Social media (Facebook, Twitter, Instagram)
• E-commerce platforms (Amazon, eBay)
• Online gaming applications

2. Multitenant SaaS applications

• When each customer or tenant has its own data.

3. Financial systems

• Large transaction volumes (stock exchanges, payment processing).

4. Time-series databases

• Logging systems (Splunk, ELK Stack).

Where is Sharding NOT Recommended?

Sharding is not ideal when:

1. Data is small and fits comfortably in a single database.
2. Cross-shard queries are frequent and complex.

• Joins and aggregations across shards can be expensive.

3. ACID compliance is strict.

• Distributed transactions across shards can be hard to manage.

4. Sharding adds operational complexity.

• It requires careful planning, monitoring, and maintenance.

3. SQL vs NoSQL: Sharding Comparison

Sharding works differently in SQL (relational) databases and NoSQL (non-relational) databases due to differences in data models and transaction handling.

Schema Design

• SQL Databases (MySQL, PostgreSQL):
  SQL databases utilize a rigid and structured schema based on tables and relationships. The structure is defined before data insertion, and any changes typically require migrations.
• NoSQL Databases (MongoDB, Cassandra):
  NoSQL systems offer a flexible, often schema-less design. Data can be stored in formats like JSON or key-value pairs, allowing for rapid iteration and adjustments without the need for strict predefined structures.

Sharding Mechanisms

• SQL Databases:
  Sharding in SQL environments is generally manual. Developers need to implement sharding logic at the application level or use middleware to partition the data across multiple databases. This approach can be complex, especially when dealing with relational constraints and joins.
• NoSQL Databases:
  Many NoSQL databases come with built-in sharding capabilities. Systems like MongoDB and Cassandra automatically distribute data across shards based on a defined shard key, reducing the operational overhead and simplifying the scaling process.

ACID Support and Consistency

• SQL Databases:
  SQL databases are designed to offer strong ACID (Atomicity, Consistency, Isolation, Durability) guarantees. While this ensures robust transactional integrity, it also makes sharding more challenging because maintaining ACID properties across multiple shards can be complex.
• NoSQL Databases:
  In contrast, NoSQL databases often prioritize scalability over strong consistency, favoring eventual consistency models. This trade-off makes sharding easier to implement, as the system can relax strict transactional requirements in favor of performance and horizontal scalability.

Query Complexity and Data Relationships

• SQL Databases:
  SQL systems support complex queries involving joins and multi-table transactions. However, when data is spread across shards, cross-shard joins and transactions can become problematic, often requiring additional logic to handle distributed queries effectively.
• NoSQL Databases:
  NoSQL databases are typically optimized for simple, fast key-based access. While they may not support complex joins natively, this design facilitates faster lookups and operations on distributed data, which aligns well with the principles of horizontal scaling.

Scalability

• SQL Databases:
  Traditional SQL databases often face limitations when scaling horizontally due to their monolithic architecture and reliance on strict consistency. Scaling out usually involves significant engineering efforts, such as implementing manual sharding or leveraging read replicas.
• NoSQL Databases:
  NoSQL systems are inherently designed for horizontal scaling. With built-in support for sharding and distributed data storage, these databases can more easily handle increasing loads and large volumes of data across multiple servers.

SQL Sharding

Manual process: SQL databases don’t have built-in sharding, so developers must implement it at the application level.

Challenges:

• Hard to maintain foreign key relationships across shards.
• Difficulties with ACID compliance (cross-shard transactions).
• Querying across shards requires extra logic.

NoSQL Sharding

Automatic or built-in: NoSQL databases like MongoDB and Cassandra support native sharding.

Advantages:

• Designed for horizontal scaling.
• No need for strict foreign key relationships.
• Supports distributed queries.

4. Sharding Strategies

There are multiple ways to distribute data across shards:

1. Key-based (Hash Sharding)

• A hash function determines which shard stores a record.
• Ensures even distribution but hard to change shard count.
• Used in MongoDB, Cassandra.

2. Range-based Sharding

• Data is partitioned based on a range (e.g., users with ID 1–1000 in shard A).
• Good for sequential queries but can create hotspots.
• Used in PostgreSQL (partitioning).

3. Geographical Sharding

• Data is stored in shards based on user location (e.g., US data in one shard, EU data in another).
• Used in multi-region databases.

4. Entity-based Sharding

• Data related to a specific entity (e.g., customer ID, company) is stored in one shard.
• Used in multi tenant SaaS.

5. When and Where to Use Sharding

Use Sharding When:

• Your dataset is too large for a single machine.
• You need high write throughput.
• Your application needs horizontal scalability.
• Your workload consists of many independent queries.

Avoid Sharding When:

• Your database size is small.
• Your queries require frequent joins across shards.
• You need strict ACID transactions.

6. Conclusion

Sharding is a powerful technique for scaling databases, but it comes with trade-offs in complexity and data consistency.

• SQL databases require manual sharding and struggle with cross-shard operations.
• NoSQL databases like MongoDB and Cassandra provide built-in sharding for easier horizontal scaling.

When choosing whether to shard, consider query patterns, data size, and operational complexity. In many cases, alternatives like read replicas or partitioning may be preferable before resorting to full sharding.

Thank you for reading !!!

If you enjoy this article and would like to Buy Me a Coffee, please click here.

you can connect with me on Linkedin.