3 ms·
I'd be careful quoting the aphyr post in that context. PG also had some failures, even in the non-replicated setup: http://aphyr.com/posts/282-call-me-maybe-pos
by Xylakant 12y ago
I'd be careful quoting the aphyr post in that context. PG also had some failures, even in the non-replicated setup: http://aphyr.com/posts/282-call-me-maybe-postgres http://aphyr.com/posts/282-call-me-maybe-postgres
Failures are just a property of distributed systems, some fail in ways that are better for you, some fail in ways that are worse, but sooner or later they all fail. It's a tradeoff which one you choose.
- moe 12y agoPG also had some failures MongoDB loses acknowledged writes in its supposed "highest consistency" mode. PostgreSQL does not. That's a pretty fundamental difference, don't you think?
- Xylakant 12y agoMongoDB was tested in a replicated setup, PG not, that's a pretty fundamental difference. Loosing acked writes in a master-slave replication with failover would be expected with a sufficiently large replication lag even for PG. MongoDB is about the last database I'd pick for any given scenario, but I acknowledge that there are people that have a usecase where it might be a good fit because the tradeoffs work out for them.
- moe 12y agoLoosing acked writes in a master-slave replication with failover would be expected with a sufficiently large replication lag even for PG. Bullshit.