3 ms·

That’s not relevant to the question of “what’s wrong with mongodb?” It seems folks just regurgitate memes without any understanding of the current product.

macintux 3y ago
I thought "I can't speak to its current state" explained that I could not, in fact, speak to its current state. But when it comes to databases, which are often the single most important part of an architecture, you'll find that many people are less forgiving of old sins, especially when Postgres now has native JSON support. Much like I won't trust Uber with my location, or Google with my email, I won't trust Mongo with my data.
- endisneigh 3y ago
  Why even reply if you don’t know what you’re talking about in terms of current mongo? Not sure what Postgres or Uber or Google even has to do with this. FYI using mongo is more than simply wanting a json interface.
  - cstrahan 3y ago
    Does this proverb sound familiar? "Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me." Maybe MongoDB is great now. That doesn't change the fact that many people have been burned by MongoDB. But, perhaps we can let maybe we can let bygones be bygones if we can determine that MongoDB is solid and dependable now. How do we make that determination? If we decide that MongoDB is now robust based on present popularity and general satisfaction, that's fallacious reasoning: https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/bandwagon https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/bandwagon After all, there was tons of stoke about MongoDB early on, only for people to realize later that their data was being silently nuked, which is why there is such a grudge against MongoDB in the first place. If an appeal to popular belief is proof, then we have a paradox. Not everyone has the time and skill to thoroughly analyze MongoDB like Kyle Kingsbury / Jepsen: https://jepsen.io/analyses/mongodb-4.2.6 https://jepsen.io/analyses/mongodb-4.2.6 And even then, there are so many other databases that have a better track record, so it would be hard to argue that the effort would be worthwhile. I don't see how you're struggling with the notion of reputation here. Maybe bias in favor of MongoDB is too strong? If that's the case, one last ditch effort: If your friend's dog has gruesomely bit you 10 out of the last 10 times you've visited him, but he swears the dog is now rehabilitated, do you just shrug off being bit over and over again, and visit your friend without even the slightest apprehension? Or do you, at the very least, remain hypervigilant, given you're history with the dog? Now replace "dog" with "MongoDB", and replace "bite" with "invaluable production data being absolutely eviscerated, resulting in your customer's lost trust and also immeasurable financial harm being done to you and your family".

macintux 3y ago

I thought "I can't speak to its current state" explained that I could not, in fact, speak to its current state. But when it comes to databases, which are often the single most important part of an architecture, you'll find that many people are less forgiving of old sins, especially when Postgres now has native JSON support. Much like I won't trust Uber with my location, or Google with my email, I won't trust Mongo with my data.

endisneigh 3y ago
Why even reply if you don’t know what you’re talking about in terms of current mongo? Not sure what Postgres or Uber or Google even has to do with this. FYI using mongo is more than simply wanting a json interface.
- cstrahan 3y ago
  Does this proverb sound familiar? "Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me." Maybe MongoDB is great now. That doesn't change the fact that many people have been burned by MongoDB. But, perhaps we can let maybe we can let bygones be bygones if we can determine that MongoDB is solid and dependable now. How do we make that determination? If we decide that MongoDB is now robust based on present popularity and general satisfaction, that's fallacious reasoning: https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/bandwagon https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/bandwagon After all, there was tons of stoke about MongoDB early on, only for people to realize later that their data was being silently nuked, which is why there is such a grudge against MongoDB in the first place. If an appeal to popular belief is proof, then we have a paradox. Not everyone has the time and skill to thoroughly analyze MongoDB like Kyle Kingsbury / Jepsen: https://jepsen.io/analyses/mongodb-4.2.6 https://jepsen.io/analyses/mongodb-4.2.6 And even then, there are so many other databases that have a better track record, so it would be hard to argue that the effort would be worthwhile. I don't see how you're struggling with the notion of reputation here. Maybe bias in favor of MongoDB is too strong? If that's the case, one last ditch effort: If your friend's dog has gruesomely bit you 10 out of the last 10 times you've visited him, but he swears the dog is now rehabilitated, do you just shrug off being bit over and over again, and visit your friend without even the slightest apprehension? Or do you, at the very least, remain hypervigilant, given you're history with the dog? Now replace "dog" with "MongoDB", and replace "bite" with "invaluable production data being absolutely eviscerated, resulting in your customer's lost trust and also immeasurable financial harm being done to you and your family".