4 ms·
I second this. Mongo clusters are easy to manage, and the aggregation pipeline or MapReduce engines do wonders on a sharded cluster with tons of data. That's th
by fermuch 9y ago
I second this. Mongo clusters are easy to manage, and the aggregation pipeline or MapReduce engines do wonders on a sharded cluster with tons of data. That's the selling point of mongo for me.
- nicholassmith 9y agoThat's interesting to me as I've been looking at Mongo aggregations for a solution to a problem but couldn't find any research on the performance of them.
- ComputerGuru 9y agoIt doesn't matter how easy to is to scale if it doesn't do it right. You can win all the internet points when it comes to speed and ease-of-use but it doesn't matter if it comes at the cost of data integrity.
- Diederich 9y ago> It doesn't matter how easy to is to scale if it doesn't do it right. I would refer you to an earlier comment: > In general NoSQL solutions are optimized for certain use-cases at the detriment of others Your definition of 'right' is absolutely not the only definition of 'right'. More to the point: there are a lot of problem spaces where the data integrity provided by MongoDB are more than sufficient.
- ComputerGuru 9y agoSorry, I meant "correct" and not "right," as the former is objective and the latter can be (though often isn't) subjective. MongoDB is not correct; in fact, it is provably incorrect. If your needs to don't require correctness, then by all means.
- orf 9y ago> with tons of data Define tons of data. I'll bet a beer that what you say can fit on a single postgres instance and even be small enough to run fine on a cheapish developer laptop.