MongoDB shares jump more than 30% in $192M IPO • Hacker News Board

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

#271

Post by Florin_Andrei » Fri, Oct 20, 2017, 1:18 AM UTC

SilasX wrote: post #181

mi100hael wrote: post #128

> "Most applications today run on a database technology that was introduced in the 1970s," Ittycheria said. "In the '70s, I was using a rotary phone to have a phone conversation. So people are looking for a modern, scalable and flexible platform." It's like a weird version of the Turing test where you have to decide whether someone's speaking seriously or in jest when they talk about NoSQL. https://www.youtube.com/wa…

"Most spaceflight trajectories are based on physics that was introduced in the 1680s. In the 1680s, we were using slide rules to multiply numbers."

Actually they were using logarithmic tables then.

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

#272

Post by tlb » Fri, Oct 20, 2017, 1:22 AM UTC

Florin_Andrei wrote: post #271

SilasX wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Most spaceflight trajectories are based on physics that was introduced in the 1680s. In the 1680s, we were using slide rules to multiply numbers."

Actually they were using logarithmic tables then.

Slide rules date to the 1620s. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slide_rule#History

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

#273

Post by gnaritas » Fri, Oct 20, 2017, 1:28 AM UTC

qaq wrote: post #236

bad_user wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, I for one think PostgreSQL is overrated. The number one reason for why people want NoSQL is horizontal scaling and for that PostgreSQL is terrible, with all available solutions being hacks that don't work.

what % of people have workload beyond something that PG on i3.16xlarge can handle?

Horizontal scaling is often just as much about redundancy as it is scaling; no one server solution is a valid answer to a production application.

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

#274

Post by manigandham » Fri, Oct 20, 2017, 1:31 AM UTC

As usual, the confusion and religious comments are numerous. There is no such thing as "nosql". There are different types of databases, with traditional relational being useful for 95% of scenarios (especially on increasingly fast servers with decent replication features) while the rest of the time something more specific is needed.

SQL is just an interface, obviously common to relational databases but can be applied to any datastore. Spark/Drill/Presto/Dremio/etc can give you SQL over any data, even just files in a folder somewhere, so let's clear up this notion between actual database technology and the access path.

Document stores are definitely useful. MongoDB is one of the better ones today although it had a rocky start. RethinkDB was an interesting experiment but never matured, RavenDB is a solid contender, Couchbase has proven itself, Riak might stick around, and there are dozens of others.

There is a place for everything and MongoDB is being used by plenty of companies to great extent. It might not always be the right choice but when it is, it works incredibly well. Good luck to the team, I'm glad to see the success in both the product and the company.

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

#275

Post by qaq » Fri, Oct 20, 2017, 1:41 AM UTC

KallDrexx wrote: post #266

qaq wrote: post #236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

what % of people have workload beyond something that PG on i3.16xlarge can handle?

It's also about locality of your data. Having a global infrastructure means 150-200ms minimum latency per query if you have a system in India or Singapore with a database server in a US data center region. That adds up quick.

That is orthogonal concern to what is being discussed if you run geo distributed Mongo cluster you will either have slow queries or will compromise on data integrity.

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

#276

Post by acdha » Fri, Oct 20, 2017, 1:42 AM UTC

autokad wrote: post #172

blauditore wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know there's quite some aversion to NoSQL around here, and generally I don't care much as I'm seldomly dealing directly with databases. But recently, I've been exposed to a fairly big and complex SQL one with several references between entities and lots, lots of X_has_Y tables. This makes me think that with growing complexity (which seems to be a general trend), NoSQL databases seem more practical at some point, or…

i got downvoted in another thread for saying nosql has a lot of advantages in reducing work like not having to worry about carefully creating indexes when joining billion row tables. someone replied you dont need indexes. i replied I dont know how you plan on running joins on billion row tables in postgress without indexes. got downvoted again. I bet they are still waiting for that join....

From the sounds of it, you were downvoted for not recognizing this as a textbook scenario with decades of practice and engine improvements devoted to allowing you to balance query performance against your server budget.

Interestingly enough, many of those techniques are common in the NoSQL world as well — a billion records is enough to require thinking about data flow anywhere — but the difference is that you have to deploy them more frequently.

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

#277

Post by KB » Fri, Oct 20, 2017, 1:44 AM UTC

Having gone through a few acquisitions where MongoDB was used, I would never recommend using it from a legal/compliance perspective. You either have to pay for a very expensive commercial license OR adhere to their AGPL license (which is very difficult).

https://opensource.google.com/docs/using/agpl-policy/ https://github.com/mongodb/mongo/blob/master/GNU-AGPL-3.0.tx...

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

#278

Post by autokad » Fri, Oct 20, 2017, 1:48 AM UTC

orf wrote: post #263

autokad wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

i got downvoted in another thread for saying nosql has a lot of advantages in reducing work like not having to worry about carefully creating indexes when joining billion row tables. someone replied you dont need indexes. i replied I dont know how you plan on running joins on billion row tables in postgress without indexes. got downvoted again. I bet they are still waiting for that join....

If you're dealing with billion row tables and using mongodb you are way out of your league. Good luck.

mongodb is not the only nosql db :) I use hive/hbase

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

#279

Post by dplgk » Fri, Oct 20, 2017, 1:52 AM UTC

Jach wrote: post #140

mi100hael wrote: post #128

> "Most applications today run on a database technology that was introduced in the 1970s," Ittycheria said. "In the '70s, I was using a rotary phone to have a phone conversation. So people are looking for a modern, scalable and flexible platform." It's like a weird version of the Turing test where you have to decide whether someone's speaking seriously or in jest when they talk about NoSQL. https://www.youtube.com/wa…

I'm continuously amazed when I hear about mongodb in use. Not over say postgres, I get that there are nosql advantages, but over literally any other nosql option. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poe%27s_law is the term you're looking for...

I can say that CouchDB makes Mongo look like an absolute dreamboat.

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

#280

Post by autokad » Fri, Oct 20, 2017, 1:55 AM UTC

parasubvert wrote: post #204

autokad wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

i got downvoted in another thread for saying nosql has a lot of advantages in reducing work like not having to worry about carefully creating indexes when joining billion row tables. someone replied you dont need indexes. i replied I dont know how you plan on running joins on billion row tables in postgress without indexes. got downvoted again. I bet they are still waiting for that join....

Whether you need indexes really depends on what you’re trying to do. Full table scans are more efficient if you are doing analytics on most of those rows in a time series. If you need 1 row in a billion, yes, you need an index.

if your doing a join on two size N tables, your O(n) cost for each record is N, thus you are doing N^2 lookups. basically reading the entire DB into memory each record.