3 ms·
The author is cataloguing some of Mongo's "paper cuts," i.e., issues for which warnings and known workarounds exist but that really make the development experie
by giaour 11y ago
The author is cataloguing some of Mongo's "paper cuts," i.e., issues for which warnings and known workarounds exist but that really make the development experience less pleasant.
For MongoDB's actual limitations, read aphyr's Call Me Maybe series.
- cwyers 11y agoRight. I am so sick and tired of MongoDB defenders saying "read the manual" after aphyr has found multiple faults in MongoDB that directly conflict with the documentation.
- stickfigure 11y agoTo be fair, aphyr analyzed Mongo's clustering behavior and found a lot of problems. Which has been a consistent refrain in the series - apparently clustering a datastore is hard. ElasticSearch and RabbitMQ fair poorly as well. Also, it's not like Postgres even tries to offer clustering. So what are you comparing Mongo to? There's no reason to believe that a single-node Mongo instance will be any less reliable than a single-node MySQL or Postgres. At least, nobody has presented that argument.
- giaour 11y agoMongo is actually great for very small datasets. But they sell it as a clustered solution (mongodb.org is currently featuring a giant banner that reads, "Agility, scalability, performance. Pick three"), so it's fair to judge them on that.
- stickfigure 11y agoI agree, but I'm getting the sense that some people (including the OP) are using the CMM article to claim that Postgres is more reliable. Postgres doesn't have this kind of clustering feature at all. Not a fair comparison.