3 ms·
I'm shocked and mortified ... Check out http://bit.ly/v1cznd http://bit.ly/v1cznd Why would you conclude that MongoDB was "fast" and SQL Server was slow? Did y
by amrith 15y ago
I'm shocked and mortified ... Check out http://bit.ly/v1cznd http://bit.ly/v1cznd
Why would you conclude that MongoDB was "fast" and SQL Server was slow? Did you run SQL server on the same SSD's and multiple HDD's?
to willvarfar's comments, what was the real fsync cost and didn't you get ACID with SQL Server? Now, if ACID is not really required, and you really really need flexible schemas, then by all means ... I understand that you want distributed-queryable-notepad, not a relational database!
- rfurlan 15y agoMongoDB has the potential to be faster than traditional relational databases simply because it does less, way less. The trade off makes sense for some applications, but not for all, it really depends on your requirements.
- rfurlan 15y agoAlso, I never said SQL Server is slow - it isn't, anyone that would say otherwise must have an agenda, which is not my case. SQL Server is an incredible database and it has served us well.