3 ms·
With 1.4% more performance than PostgreSQL, and far less guarantees w.r.t. schema. Yeah, that's not hard. It's surprising it took them this long. EDIT: The pe
by kuschku 9y ago
With 1.4% more performance than PostgreSQL, and far less guarantees w.r.t. schema.
Yeah, that's not hard. It's surprising it took them this long.
EDIT: The performance comparison that was linked, and that I was referring to: http://i.imgur.com/Thk5DlU.png http://i.imgur.com/Thk5DlU.png
- elvinyung 9y agoEdit: I'm dumb (and bad at reading words). I don't believe this assessment is entirely fair -- MongoDB essentially commits every write to a majority quorum of nodes. Remind me again how many machines a standard Postgres INSERT/UPDATE commits to? (Disclaimer: I still like Postgres better.)
- kuschku 9y agoThe benchmark measures almost exclusively read performance, so that's not really a question. Now the real question is why mongodb isn't faster than postgresql in this test. MongoDB gives so many guarantees up just to get more performance, and then looses to PostgreSQL? This is the worst trade deal in the history of trade deals.
- elvinyung 9y agoOh oops, totally misread "read" as "write" :P
- mrgordon 9y agoYep exactly. People fall for these benchmarks too easily (especially the ones released by 10gen themselves)
- merb 9y agowell I wouldn't account that benchmark. Not for mongodb and especially not for PostgreSQL. TechEmpower Benchmarks are mostly not really showcasing real world. Just looking at their PostgreSQL config will highlight that. (Especially: https://github.com/TechEmpower/FrameworkBenchmarks/blob/master/toolset/setup/linux/databases/postgresql/postgresql.conf#L173 https://github.com/TechEmpower/FrameworkBenchmarks/blob/mast...) And also most of the time their libraries/frameworks are outdated or not even configured correctly. It shouldn't be taken as a reference in any way without additional benchmarking.