3 ms·
> Why does that sound like a badly written thing, you having no knowledge of the specific domain he's referencing? I don't have the knowledge, that's why I did
by dozzie 10y ago
> Why does that sound like a badly written thing, you having no knowledge of the specific domain he's referencing?
I don't have the knowledge, that's why I didn't claim the system was badly
written, I only expressed my impression it was. I know, it's a subtle
difference easy to be overlooked, especially if somebody is invested in
similar architecture.
And it still sounds like a bad idea to tie oneself to specific log transport
and log storage, and to a single load balancer at a project time. Use of
MongoDB when already using PostgreSQL (or vice versa) doesn't add much
soundness, either.
- CydeWeys 10y agoWhy would you admit to not having knowledge of the domain in question, and then, right in the same post, continue making speculative disparaging comments about the technology stack in use, which you self-admittedly know little about? Knowing when your opinion is valuable to others, and withholding it when it is not, is a useful skill. > Use of MongoDB when already using PostgreSQL (or vice versa) doesn't add much soundness, either. Come on, they're entirely different kinds of databases. PostgreSQL is relational, MongoDB is not. It's very reasonable to use both kinds together in a larger project, each for the type of data that it is best at. I have worked on multiple software projects that combined some variant of SQL (e.g. MySQL, PostgreSQL, MS SQL) with some variant of NoSQL (e.g. MongoDB, DynamoDB, Datastore). Trying to shoehorn everything into a single schema would have been worse.