MongoDB shares jump more than 30% in $192M IPO

Post by bsaul » Thu, Oct 19, 2017, 6:37 PM UTC

erik_seaberg wrote: post #55

brianwawok wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except when you poison mindshare. For example, I used Mongo back in the early days. Was terrible. I will now never use it again. I don't care if it shoots lasers. It is dead to me. Obviously the happy developer count is way more than the hate it for life count, so I am the odd man out here. Perhaps many users never actually had many GB of data or had to deal with the data loss side of things?

Maybe they haven't noticed? I've seen databases fail in ways that take a long time to detect on accident, if you don't have a source of truth to sanity check against.

Post by [deleted] » Thu, Oct 19, 2017, 6:38 PM UTC

rhizome wrote: post #19

gremlinsinc wrote: post #2

Is it me..or does Mongo not seem as relevent and 'hip' as it once was... I mean I feel postgres is much more solid, and you can combine some of the aspects of document store via the json data types they added... of course I'm not really a DBA and don't have a lot of Mongo experience ... but personally I feel rdbms make more sense for growth/scaling..

I had a phone screen with a company just a couple of months ago that ran on MongoDB and they were committed to it.

Post by jjnoakes » Thu, Oct 19, 2017, 6:40 PM UTC

jsjohnst wrote: post #68

jjnoakes wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let's tone down the drama a little; I am willing to bet there aren't many people at all who would literally choose to lose their home versus work with a technology they don't like (even if for valid reasons, and even if those reasons include data loss or other catastrophes). If my boss tells me to use MongoDB tomorrow or live on the street despite my advice to the contrary, I will use MongoDB happily. I may look for…

[or maybe the fact I watched a hundred million $ startup go down the drain in part due to bad engineering choices, of which Mongo was one, doesn’t entitle me to a negative opinion of Mongo]

Post by thawkins » Thu, Oct 19, 2017, 6:41 PM UTC

flavio81 wrote: post #72

shubhamjain wrote: post #22

MongoDB isn't usually seen favorably but everyone must admit that it's an unlikely success story that deserves admiration. Think about it. Bringing a database to the market with a completely different paradigm, growing it to the enterprise-production-ready level, and creating a billion-dollar business around is no small deal. Yes, they did ride the NoSQL zeitgeist but they survived when others had no major success. U…

> it's an unlikely success story that deserves admiration Well, it's a success story due to marketing, smart marketing, clever marketing, and more marketing, not due to lots of technical merits. And it was not the first document store to appear, just the most successful. For starters, CouchDB was previous to MongoDB.

Post by bpicolo » Thu, Oct 19, 2017, 6:42 PM UTC

dandermotj wrote: post #74

hungerstrike wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is an example of non-relational data? A tree is relational. Each child has a relation to its parent. I can't imagine data that has no relation (no connection) to anything else. Maybe what you meant was heterogeneous (e.g. data elements that do not all have the same attributes) - but even then I can't readily come up with an example.

Sparse heterogeneous data is often the type of data stored in NoSQL dbs. Modelled in a relational way, this produces many tables with many NULL fields, while keeping it in a key value format is neat and tidy. I'd recommend the paper What Goes Around Comes Around[1], the first paper in Readings in Database Systems[2] [1] https://scholar.google.com/scholar?cluster=73661829057771494... [2]redbook.io