3 ms·
You could run mysql with the memory storage engine and with our schema--which would require multiple outer joins OR subqueries--mongodb will still be much faste
by fehguy 16y ago
You could run mysql with the memory storage engine and with our schema--which would require multiple outer joins OR subqueries--mongodb will still be much faster. So I think it's much more than an fsync issue.
- Devilboy 16y agoIf the multiple outer joins or subqueries are too slow you can always denormalise a bit, you don't have to give up on your SQL database if you don't want to.
- megaman821 16y agoI still think it is amazing the the free SQL databases don't have materialized views yet. MySQL's deficiencies aren't inherent to SQL databases. Other databases have faster query parsers and better query planners. It seems that with all the time and money invested into NoSQL solutions, Postgres could be improved to the level of Oracle or DB2.
- saurik 16y agoThis comment, which I completely agree with, really depresses me. People really like competing with each other rather than working together to build awesome solutions (and users often even /encourage/ this behavior with a pro-competition bias). The idea that we now have a million "sort of crummy" storage solutions rather than a couple, or even one, really good one--and mostly due to superficial differences in syntax of usage or specification of deployment--makes me want to cry.
- Devilboy 16y agoI suddenly hope that by 2015 PostgreSQL ends up as the winner of the database wars, having embraced and outgrown every feature from every other data store out there.