4 ms·
no the point is , while its "api" is great , you cant replace your RDBMS with a mongodb , while other solutions like redis or couchdb are "minimalist" they are
by camus 14y ago
no the point is , while its "api" is great , you cant replace your RDBMS with a mongodb , while other solutions like redis or couchdb are "minimalist" they are better suited for what nosql db are for , high availability and scalling.
- ukd1 14y agoUnfortunately that's not true: it depends directly on what you are doing with your RDBMS - there are many work loads which are better suited to MongoDB. Obviously there are also many which are not. Unless I'm out of date, Redis and High Availability don't go together in the same sentence; awesome as it is, it's still a single point of failure.
- camus 14y ago> Obviously there are also many which are not. that's exactly what i am saying.
- bsg75 14y ago> Unless I'm out of date, Redis and High Availability don't go together in the same sentence; awesome as it is, it's still a single point of failure. Clustering is a work in progress (http://redis.io/topics/cluster-spec http://redis.io/topics/cluster-spec , http://redis.io/presentation/Redis_Cluster.pdf http://redis.io/presentation/Redis_Cluster.pdf), replication is available (http://redis.io/topics/replication http://redis.io/topics/replication).