4 ms·
Agreed. I found the mapreduce criticisms to be a little off: > Now instead of fixing a bad implementation or fixing the underlaying architectural issues, Mong
by dreadpirateryan 14y ago
Agreed. I found the mapreduce criticisms to be a little off:
> Now instead of fixing a bad implementation or fixing the underlaying architectural issues, MongoDB is moving to Hadoop.
I don't think that's accurate. They have a new "aggregation framework" coming that is meant to replace mapreduce. It could be a wrapper around hadoop, but I couldn't find anything documented about that. I completely agree that a blocking mapreduce is annoying, however, does any framework have a non-blocking mapreduce? I haven't tried many mapreduce implementations out, so this is a genuine question.
- bunderbunder 14y agoI don't believe RavenDB blocks. Instead, it returns the results along with a flag to indicate if any of the source data may have been modified while the operation was running.
- mattwarren 14y agoYou're right, all RavenDB indexing operations (including Map/Reduce) are done on background threads. When you query, it returns a flag (as you say) indicating if the index is currently stale or not.
- zachanker 14y agoThe aggregation framework is meant to fill a gap between SQLs SUM, COUNT, AVG, etc without requiring a full map/reduce. The Hadoop integrations are unrelated and are just a nice little bonus that they added.