2 ms·

Oh wow. More MongoDB servers and it did worse? That's really surprising and disappointing for MongoDB. hmm and good point. It does seem like shard key would be

by Keverw 10y ago

Oh wow. More MongoDB servers and it did worse? That's really surprising and disappointing for MongoDB. hmm and good point. It does seem like shard key would be possibly limited to just 1 common query. I haven't really got to that part yet myself, just going by what I've learned so far in the class I'm taking. edit: oh reread. 2 servers per instance, not the same amount of actual server instances. I wonder if you ran 1 per instance if you'd get better results... I know the MongoDB people seem to hype it up and some large companies are using it. The system does seem like a good dream if it worksout.

skjhn 10y ago
Sort of. One of the requirements was replication. The databases had to replicate every document so that it was stored on two different nodes. This ensures availability. The only way to do that with MongoDB is to run secondary nodes too. Now, it's possible to do say 4 primary and 4 secondaries, but performance would go down because only 4 nodes could do the writing. The problem is that it rarely works out. It's fine at first, but down the road...