4 ms·

Mongo isn't so important to this question as ODB vs RDBMS. Here's some light reading: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Object-relational_impedance_mismatch http:/

Mongo isn't so important to this question as ODB vs RDBMS. Here's some light reading: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Object-relational_impedance_mismatch http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Object-relational_impedance_mis... MongoDB is just ODB, and MySQL is just RDB. Besides, postgres is the real future!

dleblanc 14y ago
Not sure what Wu-Tang has to do with this, but.... Seriously though, is Mongo an ODB, or a document oriented database? ODBs/OODBs imply a much different use-case and functionality, and I think we ought not conflate the two.
- ww520 14y ago
  Mongo is not an ODB in the traditional ODB sense. Mongo is just a document (or blob) database. ODB supports relationship, link traversal, inheritance, etc. Basically the whole shebang of the OO notions in a database.
- diminoten 14y ago
  You're right, I didn't know there was a difference.
taligent 14y ago
PostgreSQL is the PAST and it will forever remain there until it solves its biggest problems. It is the hardest out of all databases I've used to cluster, replicate, shard and manage. And the database world is moving towards scaling horizontally rather than vertically. I can push a button in say CouchDB to replicate and shard. Try doing that in PostgreSQL.
- true_religion 14y ago
  People still use SQLlite. Why? Because its suits a specific set of circumstances. Postgres does the same---its an incredibly powerful database with a large suit of features that make application development both easy and sane. To the vast majority of projects where you won't outgrow a single server, it makes sense to use it.
- jeffdavis 14y ago
  "And the database world is moving towards scaling horizontally rather than vertically." I think that's an oversimplification. Two counterpoints: * Database systems will always need to make heavy use of locality. The speed of light means that synchronizing access over long distances (even medium distances -- light only goes about a foot per nanosecond) will always be a challenge. * Multi-core means vertical scaling is back in (if by "vertical scaling" you mean "scaling on one box"), and probably for a while. Postgres is doing an excellent job at both. I do agree with the less-exaggerated point that postgres really needs to improve its multi-machine scaling. But it's far from a solved problem on any system under discussion.
  - andyzweb 14y ago
    postgres does horrible with multicore unless you have many concurrent pooled connections. fork-and-forget
    - jeffdavis 14y ago
      I think you're referring to postgres's inability to use more than one core per query, which is true (or mostly true... there are quite a few helper processes that take on some of the work). For many smaller queries, postgres does great on multi-core, and pgbouncer is a good connection pooler.
- np422 14y ago
  You have obviously never used Oracle RAC .. :)

dleblanc 14y ago

Not sure what Wu-Tang has to do with this, but.... Seriously though, is Mongo an ODB, or a document oriented database? ODBs/OODBs imply a much different use-case and functionality, and I think we ought not conflate the two.

ww520 14y ago
Mongo is not an ODB in the traditional ODB sense. Mongo is just a document (or blob) database. ODB supports relationship, link traversal, inheritance, etc. Basically the whole shebang of the OO notions in a database.
diminoten 14y ago
You're right, I didn't know there was a difference.

taligent 14y ago

PostgreSQL is the PAST and it will forever remain there until it solves its biggest problems. It is the hardest out of all databases I've used to cluster, replicate, shard and manage. And the database world is moving towards scaling horizontally rather than vertically. I can push a button in say CouchDB to replicate and shard. Try doing that in PostgreSQL.

true_religion 14y ago
People still use SQLlite. Why? Because its suits a specific set of circumstances. Postgres does the same---its an incredibly powerful database with a large suit of features that make application development both easy and sane. To the vast majority of projects where you won't outgrow a single server, it makes sense to use it.
jeffdavis 14y ago
"And the database world is moving towards scaling horizontally rather than vertically." I think that's an oversimplification. Two counterpoints: * Database systems will always need to make heavy use of locality. The speed of light means that synchronizing access over long distances (even medium distances -- light only goes about a foot per nanosecond) will always be a challenge. * Multi-core means vertical scaling is back in (if by "vertical scaling" you mean "scaling on one box"), and probably for a while. Postgres is doing an excellent job at both. I do agree with the less-exaggerated point that postgres really needs to improve its multi-machine scaling. But it's far from a solved problem on any system under discussion.
- andyzweb 14y ago
  postgres does horrible with multicore unless you have many concurrent pooled connections. fork-and-forget
  - jeffdavis 14y ago
    I think you're referring to postgres's inability to use more than one core per query, which is true (or mostly true... there are quite a few helper processes that take on some of the work). For many smaller queries, postgres does great on multi-core, and pgbouncer is a good connection pooler.
np422 14y ago
You have obviously never used Oracle RAC .. :)