3 ms·
Quote from the original author in the comments. TLDR: it was human error that got us into this situation: "The lack of joins & transactions of course did facto
by wiremine 13y ago
Quote from the original author in the comments. TLDR: it was human error that got us into this situation:
"The lack of joins & transactions of course did factor into the original decision. My point (which perhaps could be clearer) was that MongoDB ended up being used outside of the area in which we originally intended to use it. There was some reluctance to add another technology when we could get by with what we had for what was (initially) only a small use. Additionally, some limitations were not always well understood by web developers (who were new to mongo and enthusiastic to try it). I see this as our mistake. With hindsight, it’s clear we should have introduced an RDBMS immediately and kept MongoDB for managing the crawl data."
- jeffdavis 13y agoDatabases almost always grow outside of their original scope, much more so than applications. And there is a good reason: data is more valuable when it's combined with other data. So I think it's reasonable to be cautious about using a system that can't effectively grow outside of its initial special purpose.
- foobar1988 13y agoProof that the OP was just looking for more Hacker News cred so they wrote about why MongoDB sucks but in reality wanted to discuss their "human error" :p Nice marketing guys http://blog.serverdensity.com/does-everyone-hate-mongodb/ http://blog.serverdensity.com/does-everyone-hate-mongodb/