3 ms·

Then how on earth is it possible to build Parse.com with MongoDB? http://blog.parse.com/announcements/mongodb-rocksdb-parse/ http://blog.parse.com/announcement

Then how on earth is it possible to build Parse.com with MongoDB? http://blog.parse.com/announcements/mongodb-rocksdb-parse/ http://blog.parse.com/announcements/mongodb-rocksdb-parse/

sklivvz1971 11y ago
Maybe you didn't get the joke. The joke is not about MongoDB, but about MongoDB fanbois that care only about some very narrow definition of "performance". The wider message is that DBs are way more complex beasts that is meaningful to test this way. Obviously there are cases in which MongoDB is a great choice, but equally obviously tests like this should not be a reason for the choice.
- weddpros 11y ago
  I do understand that second degree, but I don't think the author is a fanboy... At work, we're also Mongodb users. If tomorrow we try to benchmark against Cassandra, performance will probably be the selling point. I don't think it's absurd to compare mongodb and rethinkdb, they're very similar dbs. As for the benchmark, I agree it doesn't explore every facet of both databases and focus on performance... That's what benchmarks do. The intent of the author may have been to challenge his existing choice (mongodb) which is a good thing. The (corrected) results may lead to: expect no performance gain if we migrate to RethinkDB... What's wrong with that?
  - sklivvz1971 11y ago
    Well, OK. I am not calling the author a fanboy, and i'll agree they probably aren't. There are at least 3 things here which invalidate this post because they make the numbers uncomparable: 1. Is the hardware adequate to run the tests, or does it favor one database? 2. Are both databases tuned to the use case? 3. Running only one type of action at a time is meaningless. Contention between reads and writes is what normally drives performance stats.
  - eevilspock 11y ago
    > but I don't think the author is a fanboy... The title of the post is "RethinkDB reviewed by a MongoDB fan"

Then how on earth is it possible to build Parse.com with MongoDB? http://blog.parse.com/announcements/mongodb-rocksdb-parse/ http://blog.parse.com/announcements/mongodb-rocksdb-parse/

sklivvz1971 11y ago

Maybe you didn't get the joke. The joke is not about MongoDB, but about MongoDB fanbois that care only about some very narrow definition of "performance". The wider message is that DBs are way more complex beasts that is meaningful to test this way. Obviously there are cases in which MongoDB is a great choice, but equally obviously tests like this should not be a reason for the choice.

weddpros 11y ago
I do understand that second degree, but I don't think the author is a fanboy... At work, we're also Mongodb users. If tomorrow we try to benchmark against Cassandra, performance will probably be the selling point. I don't think it's absurd to compare mongodb and rethinkdb, they're very similar dbs. As for the benchmark, I agree it doesn't explore every facet of both databases and focus on performance... That's what benchmarks do. The intent of the author may have been to challenge his existing choice (mongodb) which is a good thing. The (corrected) results may lead to: expect no performance gain if we migrate to RethinkDB... What's wrong with that?
- sklivvz1971 11y ago
  Well, OK. I am not calling the author a fanboy, and i'll agree they probably aren't. There are at least 3 things here which invalidate this post because they make the numbers uncomparable: 1. Is the hardware adequate to run the tests, or does it favor one database? 2. Are both databases tuned to the use case? 3. Running only one type of action at a time is meaningless. Contention between reads and writes is what normally drives performance stats.
- eevilspock 11y ago
  > but I don't think the author is a fanboy... The title of the post is "RethinkDB reviewed by a MongoDB fan"