4 ms·
People like to give MongoDB shit, but is actually pretty fun to use. I wouldn't use it as a "big data platform." At scale I'd use Cassandra. For relational data
by leokun 13y ago
People like to give MongoDB shit, but is actually pretty fun to use. I wouldn't use it as a "big data platform." At scale I'd use Cassandra. For relational data I'd use postgresql. For memory caching, Redis. So when do I use MongoDB? For prototyping. Why? Because it's fun to use.
- threeseed 13y agoSorry but "fun" or "developer productivity" aren't allowed. You have to have a database that is expensive, obtuse or difficult to manage to be taken seriously.
- AlisdairO 13y agoTo be taken seriously when making performance claims about 'relational databases' rather than 'mysql', yes, you may need to venture into products that aren't as simple as mysql.
- alrs 13y ago"Developer Productivity" that leads to "ops people refuse to work here" isn't a stellar strategy.
- Diederich 13y agoDo 'ops people' tend to not like MongoDB?
- alrs 13y agoDespise it.
- cnlwsu 13y agoIn all fairness the only tools that are not (speaking from a devops position at least) hated is chef or puppet. Everything else will at some point go down at 2am.
- aioprisan 13y agoreally? all the ops people that I've worked with have been pretty enthusiastic about it, more so than a mysql instance with bugs in 5.5 that created huge performance issues with multi-table joins (i.e. http://dba.stackexchange.com/questions/13817/mysql-5-5-strange-behavior-with-group-by-with-limit-based-of-index-vs-index-for http://dba.stackexchange.com/questions/13817/mysql-5-5-stran...)
- Diederich 13y agoI've been nothing but an 'ops guy' for 20 years now, and I've been enthusiastically using MongoDB for my 'devops' work since 2009. Having said that, I've never used MongoDB 'on the large'. I've always used MongoDB against datasets that mostly fit into memory, and use some other solution for 'bigger data'. I suspect most of the MongoDB dislike is rooted in three points: 1. The 'Mongo People' really over-hyped it early on. 2. The decision to not have single-server disk safety (but providing very elegant multi-server data safety) was a poorly understood decision. I personally agree with their direction. Your data isn't really, really safe until it's on more than one system. 3. Based on what I've read, I don't think MongoDB scales up (even with their built-in sharding) as well as some other solutions. Perhaps this is limited to some kinds of use cases, and not others. In my opinion, for people who do day to day fast development with dynamic languages, like myself, MongoDB, used correctly, is really fantastic, at least for many use cases.
- nasalgoat 13y agoNot a big fan.
- mratzloff 13y agoAnyone who has to manage a cluster of any size must.
- deleted 13y ago[deleted]
- asdasf 13y agoDo you also have to post the most transparent and pathetic strawman in history?
- JulianMorrison 13y agoConsider RethinkDB. It has all the advantages of MongoDB, scales better and is better behaved. It's not production safe yet (particularly, you have to dump/reload on updates), but it's expected to become so by the end of the year. MongoDB is only fun to program against. Not fun to admin, even on a prototype instance. RethinkDB is fun to admin.
- leokun 13y agoI'll give it a shot. :)