3 ms·
(speaker here) For the record something I did not mention in my slides or talk is that our data was not highly relational. For very similar data we've used non
by schmichael 15y ago
(speaker here)
For the record something I did not mention in my slides or talk is that our data was not highly relational. For very similar data we've used non-SQL databases with success.
Definitely should be something I make clear in my talk, so people don't think we foolishly tried MongoDB for highly relational data.
- cloudhead 15y agoThanks for the clarification, my comment wasn't targeted at you actually (it seems like MongoDB could have been a good fit here), but at developers who don't even consider the kind of usage, but instead think of MongoDB as a "better MySQL", when they are in fact fundamentally different. So thank you for posting this, it may make some people reconsider before they jump ship, or at least understand the trade-offs.
- fiaz 15y agoWhat other non-SQL databases have you used with success?
- schmichael 15y agoCassandra, but mainly because we have a couple devs who are excellent at debugging Java/JVM issues. Cassandra is young enough you really need to expect to get your hands dirty in its code to keep things humming. (I may be more forgiving of Cassandra because, unlike Mongo, Cassandra's major version number is 0). Another team seems awfully happy with Hadoop, although they've been bitten by an HDFS related bug. I can't speak too much to their experience. Memcached of course is wonderful, and the little bit I've used Redis it has lived up to its promises. Riak is the only non-relational database I can think of that I've only heard positive things about, but I've never personally used it.
- gtuhl 15y agoI'm a big fan of Redis precisely because it has a short list of promises and executes them well. So many of these other new data stores promise "infinite scale" and leave out the "as long as it fits in RAM" part.