> At the end of the day an engineer shouldn’t pick database because it’s the fastest but because it fits their use case the best. Every comparison article does

> At the end of the day an engineer shouldn’t pick database because it’s the fastest but because it fits their use case the best. Every comparison article doesn't need to (and shouldn't) include a comparison about every kind of detail about two technologies. > I get that reddis, memcached, and keydb are all roughly in memory hashmaps but beyond that knowing what makes them different, how hard are they to operate, what they are good at and bad at is going to be more helpful in selecting which technology to use than a simple throughout benchmark. If a post is about speed/performance, and you want to know implementation details (or accessibility or how well it plays with your stack) then look for something else. A quick google search quickly gives me whatever details I want to know about whatever two widely used technologies: For example redis vs memcached: https://stackoverflow.com/questions/10558465/memcached-vs-redis https://stackoverflow.com/questions/10558465/memcached-vs-re... But more importantly its okay for a post to be narrow in scope. The requirement should be that it is not misleading in whatever question it sets out to answer.