The Great Migration from MongoDB to PostgreSQL

Post by thiht » Sat, Mar 30, 2024, 9:30 AM UTC

darby_eight wrote: post #267

wlll wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The price of persistent storage and memory was the same for Mongo as it was for Postgres back when the NoSQL movement happened. Mongo wasn't made of magic scaling fairies and still needed resources. As soon as you cranked up the safety of Mongo to a nearly acceptable level it's performance fell through the floor. The only reason people though it performed amazingly was because of Mongo's rather deceptive marketing. I…

I am certainly not going to defend mongo ever having being a good choice; I was referring to other "NoSQL" databases (namely, the large number of highly scalable key-value stores).

Post by zo1 » Sat, Mar 30, 2024, 11:31 AM UTC

pydry wrote: post #312

zo1 wrote: post #225

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From the other side, people like me, see your odd dismissive behaviour in the same light. This bridge and hundreds of other things going wrong throughout the world atm are all symptoms of some sort of rotten problem, and I honestly don't know why you guys are so adamant about dismissing it. Almost as if you want to see it all come crashing down. Pure evil, as Trump would call it.

>From the other side, people like me, see your odd dismissive behaviour in the same light. This bridge and hundreds of other things going wrong throughout the world atm are all symptoms of some sort of rotten problem Just one problem, huh? This illustrates what I meant about black and white thinking.

Post by pmarreck » Sat, Mar 30, 2024, 12:55 PM UTC

paulryanrogers wrote: post #142

pmarreck wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oracle is a giant mess, is the sense I got from trying to work with it in the past. While I am loathe to recommend any Microsoft product, SQL Server is at least coherent, and has actual transactions like Oracle (and not just "checkpoints")

Aren't MSSQL and Oracle just doing redo logs, like MySQL? What do you consider not actual transactions? Postgresql keeps dead tuples in place until vacuumed, which seems optimized for rollbacks. But isn't so bad if you're inserting much more than deleting or updating.

Post by wlll » Sat, Mar 30, 2024, 6:35 PM UTC

Pengtuzi wrote: post #252

wlll wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I do scaling and performance work, mostly with Rails apps, but a significant amount of the work is database level and not language specific. I've used both postgres and MySQL (and a few other databases) going back to 2000. The best thing I can hear from a company when I start is "We use Postgres". If they're using postgres then I know there's likely a far smoother path to performance than with MySQL. It has better to…

Two paragraphs about yourself and ending with a very vague sentence that “answers” their question. 10/10

Post by sgent » Sat, Mar 30, 2024, 8:22 PM UTC

evanelias wrote: post #291

mixmastamyk wrote: post #286

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Citus is open source and well financed. This comment may have made sense a few years ago, but no longer.

By "well financed" you mean "owned by Microsoft"? That situation raises a separate set of concerns, especially in the context of Microsoft's main database cash cow being SQL Server, not Postgres/Citus.