4 ms·

I never understood all the hate mongo gets. Like any tool, if people simply took the time to understand it and use it correctly, maybe they wouldn't run into is

I never understood all the hate mongo gets. Like any tool, if people simply took the time to understand it and use it correctly, maybe they wouldn't run into issues.

macintux 8y ago
MongoDB made some very sketchy, undocumented (or poorly documented) technical decisions in its early years that placed data at great risk. It's better now, but very few things worry technical people more than a database that loses data. It's hard to get past that early impression.
- icedchai 8y ago
  Then again, so did MySQL. Do you remember the MySQL 3.x "MyISAM" days? No transactions, automatic truncation and type conversions, etc...
  - vesak 8y ago
    ...and a significant portion of IT people still distrust MySQL.
    - merb 8y ago
      ... or they love it, like uber
  - int_19h 8y ago
    MySQL was very upfront about it, though. They always said that if you wanted that stuff, there are real RDBMS for that.
  - pritambaral 8y ago
    MySQL still has some unsafe behaviours. Even if it were to fix them all, I still wouldn't use it or recommend it, on account of finding it difficult-to-impossible to trust the design and engineering behind it.
- jimktrains2 8y ago
  early? > This interpretation hinges on interpreting successful sub-majority writes as not necessarily successful: rather, a successful response is merely a suggestion that the write has probably occurred, or might later occur, or perhaps will occur, be visible to some clients, then un-occur, or perhaps nothing will happen whatsoever. > We note that this remains MongoDB's default level of write safety. - http://jepsen.io/analyses/mongodb-3-6-4 http://jepsen.io/analyses/mongodb-3-6-4
  - fwiw1 8y ago
    So a user selects the write safety level they wish. Ok.
- fwiw1 8y ago
  Quite easy, actually. Those that started using MongoDB in the last 5 years had little bias or negative experience, and are generally happy users.

I never understood all the hate mongo gets. Like any tool, if people simply took the time to understand it and use it correctly, maybe they wouldn't run into issues.

macintux 8y ago

MongoDB made some very sketchy, undocumented (or poorly documented) technical decisions in its early years that placed data at great risk. It's better now, but very few things worry technical people more than a database that loses data. It's hard to get past that early impression.

icedchai 8y ago
Then again, so did MySQL. Do you remember the MySQL 3.x "MyISAM" days? No transactions, automatic truncation and type conversions, etc...
- vesak 8y ago
  ...and a significant portion of IT people still distrust MySQL.
  - merb 8y ago
    ... or they love it, like uber
- int_19h 8y ago
  MySQL was very upfront about it, though. They always said that if you wanted that stuff, there are real RDBMS for that.
- pritambaral 8y ago
  MySQL still has some unsafe behaviours. Even if it were to fix them all, I still wouldn't use it or recommend it, on account of finding it difficult-to-impossible to trust the design and engineering behind it.
jimktrains2 8y ago
early? > This interpretation hinges on interpreting successful sub-majority writes as not necessarily successful: rather, a successful response is merely a suggestion that the write has probably occurred, or might later occur, or perhaps will occur, be visible to some clients, then un-occur, or perhaps nothing will happen whatsoever. > We note that this remains MongoDB's default level of write safety. - http://jepsen.io/analyses/mongodb-3-6-4 http://jepsen.io/analyses/mongodb-3-6-4
- fwiw1 8y ago
  So a user selects the write safety level they wish. Ok.
fwiw1 8y ago
Quite easy, actually. Those that started using MongoDB in the last 5 years had little bias or negative experience, and are generally happy users.