3 ms·
> Are you still on MongoDB? > Oh god no. Pretty damning condemnation of MongoDB, no?
by pdog 13y ago
> Are you still on MongoDB?
> Oh god no.
Pretty damning condemnation of MongoDB, no?
- matm 13y agoFor our use case, it just wasn't the right fit. In particular: 1) we needed more features/performance than Mongo's aggregation framework provided, 2) the mongod global lock was prohibitive for our write throughout (turning off fsync wasn't suitable), 3) schema migrations were difficult/impossible without transactional guarantees. It seems like Mongo's addressed some of these concerns since we started building Heap.
- raverbashing 13y agoHumm... No They also outgrew PostgreSQL, and gave up on Redshift, is that a condemnation of them as well?
- deleted 13y ago[deleted]
- aaronblohowiak 13y agoLooks like they are still using PostgreSQL, just not a single instance. It looks like they are using Citus Data to handling sharding and merging responses.
- chris_wot 13y agoHe said that PostgreSQL scaled pretty well, but he got rid of MongoDB in one week. Seems pretty damning to me.
- copergi 13y agoOdd that they think they outgrew postgresql, while only dealing with a tiny 30k tps.