4 ms·
Pretty good and much the same sensible architectural choices as many other already successful companies aside from the neo4j choice. Just use a normal db like p
by mianos 11y ago
Pretty good and much the same sensible architectural choices as many other already successful companies aside from the neo4j choice. Just use a normal db like postgres like everyone else. There are good reasons why the biggest sites in the world use or have moved to using an RDBMS. They may not be cool but they work. I'll not expand on all the reasons but a trivial search will enumerate them extensively. You already have some cool stuff like mongo, a store I love, and hate.
ActiveMQ? I can't think of anyone else using it. Is there a good reason why everyone seems to be using rabbitmq?
- cihangirsavas 11y ago> Is there a good reason why everyone seems to be using rabbitmq? it simply does work, has extensive language support (client packages), plenty of good documentation
- manig 11y agoThank you for reading this and sharing your feedback. Well this is more of a template to get started. It is not really "one size fits all" solution. I agree, instead of getting carried away by all these no-sql solutions, one may get started with RDBMS and then as they grow, may take a decision to move towards a no-sql solution or what ever solves the problem. But from my experience I can tell you that, if things go "as-planned" in terms of data and traffic, soon one will have to move a part of their data to a no-sql store. >> ActiveMQ? I can't think of anyone else using it I have used ActiveMQ multiple times, and found it to be a stable MOM. I love its scheduler support and some of its cool features like message grouping, virtual destination, composite destinations and wildcards. Of course, like you said there are many other alternatives too.