11–20 of 20 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I would be using it if it didn't insist on MongoDB. I just dont trust data I care about to it
with a CMS you have barely any writes. Not sure your fear is well grounded in reality :)
Not to mention everytime a user of the site updates content
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I would be using it if it didn't insist on MongoDB. I just dont trust data I care about to it
with a CMS you have barely any writes. Not sure your fear is well grounded in reality :)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I would be using it if it didn't insist on MongoDB. I just dont trust data I care about to it
with a CMS you have barely any writes. Not sure your fear is well grounded in reality :)
Dont get me wrong - I get the value proposition of mongo - but in this case, it is taking away a lot and not giving me anything in return.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
with a CMS you have barely any writes. Not sure your fear is well grounded in reality :)
I'm not well-versed in Mongo, but it seems like the comment was saying that he didn't trust Mongo to handle any writes. Your response seems to say that since there aren't many writes to lose, it's okay. Does that concede that Mongo will lose data? (I didn't know that about Mongo.)
What the comment you're responding to is saying is that when you aren't making many writes, you can afford to switch transactions on and have Mongo lock the whole database because the odds of having a read come in at the same moment are much lower than if you were making a write every second.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
with a CMS you have barely any writes. Not sure your fear is well grounded in reality :)
Doesn't everytime you update anything with the cms require a write? (asking purely out of ignorance to learn not to be snarky) Not to mention everytime a user of the site updates content
Fetching gem metadata from https://rubygems.org/./Users/hs/.rvm/rubies/ruby-1.9.3-p0/li...: [BUG] Segmentation fault ruby 1.9.3p0 (2011-10-30 revision 33570) [x86_64-darwin11.2.0]
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm not well-versed in Mongo, but it seems like the comment was saying that he didn't trust Mongo to handle any writes. Your response seems to say that since there aren't many writes to lose, it's okay. Does that concede that Mongo will lose data? (I didn't know that about Mongo.)
To explain the parent comment, in a write heavy application, you would probably want to turn off transactions in Mongo in return for the performance gain. What the comment you're responding to is saying is that when you aren't making many writes, you can afford to switch transactions on and have Mongo lock the whole database because the odds of having a read come in at the same moment are much lower than if you were…
Much more informative than a downvote.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
with a CMS you have barely any writes. Not sure your fear is well grounded in reality :)
Just an opinion - none of us will be able to push Locomotive in an enterprise setting (which is precisely where CMS makes a lot of sense) without it supporting a relational DB. Dont get me wrong - I get the value proposition of mongo - but in this case, it is taking away a lot and not giving me anything in return.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Just an opinion - none of us will be able to push Locomotive in an enterprise setting (which is precisely where CMS makes a lot of sense) without it supporting a relational DB. Dont get me wrong - I get the value proposition of mongo - but in this case, it is taking away a lot and not giving me anything in return.
We chose the tools that worked best for us and for our clients. LocomotiveCMS is already used by startups, web agencies, and big companies to design, deploy, and update sites every day. If Mongodb becomes a limiting factor, or if someone provides an equally elegant implementation on top of a RDMS, we'll happily switch. Until then, we'll focus on building our vision of the most elegant and friendly CMS possible.
Were you able to design a better architecture because of Mongo/nosql or was it developer productivity ?