3 ms·

All the cool kids are beating up this mongo kid, let's join in, we'll be cool too! I'm sorry but your comment here on HN adds no value other than just piling o

All the cool kids are beating up this mongo kid, let's join in, we'll be cool too! I'm sorry but your comment here on HN adds no value other than just piling on. MongoDB has indeed a purpose, and it's wildly misunderstood. MongoDB initially optimized for engineering efficiency (allowing developers to prototype quickly) over engineering quality. This allowed them to gain market share and with the newfound wealth (and unicorn valuation) then buy up a real storage engine which supports transactions, and written by DB veterans (of BerkeleyDB fame). Early versions were definitely buggy, but since bringing in WiredTiger, they're now a serious player. That initial gamble on optimizing for engineering ease-of-use is the reason they're not out of business, like Rethink and Basho. As a startup you have to hustle, can't just sell on the philosophical beauty of cleanly abstracted haskell.

gaius 9y ago
That initial gamble on optimizing for engineering ease-of-use But that was not a clever gambit. They had a bad product that they told a lot of lies about. That they got rich doing that is a sad indictment of our industry.
- threeseed 9y ago
  Have you actually the product ? And be honest here. Because it was never a truly awful product. Yes it had some bugs but it was no worse than what we were seeing with Oracle or Cassandra. And if you call marketing blurbs "lies" then I am surprised you manage to survive day to day at all. PostgreSQL calls their database the "most advanced", Oracle calls theirs "#1 Database for Cloud Scale Simplicity". It's just regular marketing fluff.
  - brianwawok 9y ago
    I used it. It was awful. I cannot think of a single use case for mongo.
  - gaius 9y ago
    Yep. Project to replace a single 24-core, 24G, SAN-connected Oracle box with 10 48-core, 96G boxes with internal SSD running Mongo. The Oracle box was faster and had a DBA look at it maybe once a week. The Mongo setup required a full time team of a half dozen people. It's a complete joke. And their marketing lies included "you don't need a DBA"..

gaius 9y ago

That initial gamble on optimizing for engineering ease-of-use But that was not a clever gambit. They had a bad product that they told a lot of lies about. That they got rich doing that is a sad indictment of our industry.

threeseed 9y ago
Have you actually the product ? And be honest here. Because it was never a truly awful product. Yes it had some bugs but it was no worse than what we were seeing with Oracle or Cassandra. And if you call marketing blurbs "lies" then I am surprised you manage to survive day to day at all. PostgreSQL calls their database the "most advanced", Oracle calls theirs "#1 Database for Cloud Scale Simplicity". It's just regular marketing fluff.
- brianwawok 9y ago
  I used it. It was awful. I cannot think of a single use case for mongo.
- gaius 9y ago
  Yep. Project to replace a single 24-core, 24G, SAN-connected Oracle box with 10 48-core, 96G boxes with internal SSD running Mongo. The Oracle box was faster and had a DBA look at it maybe once a week. The Mongo setup required a full time team of a half dozen people. It's a complete joke. And their marketing lies included "you don't need a DBA"..