Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

MongoDB acquires Voyage AI

investors.mongodb.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 172 posts

Re: MongoDB acquires Voyage AI

#81

Post by threeseed »

thayne wrote: post #68
computerfan494 wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I will copy and paste a comment I wrote here previously: "MongoDB ships with horizontal sharding out-of-the-box, has idiomatic and well-maintained drivers for pretty much every language you could want (no C library re-use), is reasonably vendor-neutral and can be run locally, and the data modeling it encourages is both preferential for some people as well as pushes users to avoid patterns that don't scale very well w…

> MongoDB ships with horizontal sharding out-of-the-box Maybe it's better than it was, but my experience with Mongodb a decade ago is that that horizontal sharding didn't work very well. We constantly ran into data corruption and performance issues with rebalancing the shards. So much so that we had a company party to celebrate moving off of Mongodb.

> my experience with Mongodb a decade ago

So before the Apple Watch was released.

Why is this relevant today ? Technology changes very quickly.

Re: MongoDB acquires Voyage AI

#82

Post by scosman »

threeseed wrote: post #77
jamesrr39 wrote: post #67

Genuine question: I appreciate the comments about MongoDB being much better than it was 10 years ago; but Postgres is also much better today than then as well. What situations is Mongo better than Postgres? Why choose Mongo in 2025?

a) MongoDB has built-in, supported, proven scalability and high availability features. PostgreSQL does not. If it wasn't for cloud offerings like AWS Aurora providing them no company would even bother with PostgreSQL at all. It's 2025 these features are not-negotiable for most use cases. b) MongoDB does one thing well. JSON documents. If your domain model is built around that then nothing is faster. Seriously nothing…

A) Postgres easily scales to billions of rows without breaking a sweat. After that shard. It’s definitely negotiable.

Re: MongoDB acquires Voyage AI

#83

Post by delusional »

threeseed wrote: post #77
jamesrr39 wrote: post #67

Genuine question: I appreciate the comments about MongoDB being much better than it was 10 years ago; but Postgres is also much better today than then as well. What situations is Mongo better than Postgres? Why choose Mongo in 2025?

a) MongoDB has built-in, supported, proven scalability and high availability features. PostgreSQL does not. If it wasn't for cloud offerings like AWS Aurora providing them no company would even bother with PostgreSQL at all. It's 2025 these features are not-negotiable for most use cases. b) MongoDB does one thing well. JSON documents. If your domain model is built around that then nothing is faster. Seriously nothing…

> It's 2025 these features are not-negotiable for most use cases.

Excuse me? I do enterprise apps, along with most of the developers I know. We run like 100 transactions per second and can easily survive hours of planned downtime.

It's 2025, computers are really fast. I barely need a database, but ACID makes transaction processing so much easier.

Re: MongoDB acquires Voyage AI

#84

Post by threeseed »

scosman wrote: post #82
threeseed wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

a) MongoDB has built-in, supported, proven scalability and high availability features. PostgreSQL does not. If it wasn't for cloud offerings like AWS Aurora providing them no company would even bother with PostgreSQL at all. It's 2025 these features are not-negotiable for most use cases. b) MongoDB does one thing well. JSON documents. If your domain model is built around that then nothing is faster. Seriously nothing…

A) Postgres easily scales to billions of rows without breaking a sweat. After that shard. It’s definitely negotiable.

So does a text file.

Statements like yours are meaningless when you aren't specific about the operations, schema, access patterns etc.

If you have a single server, relational use case then PostgreSQL is great. But like all technology it's not great at everything.

Re: MongoDB acquires Voyage AI

#85

Post by amazingamazing »

riku_iki wrote: post #70
jamesrr39 wrote: post #67

Genuine question: I appreciate the comments about MongoDB being much better than it was 10 years ago; but Postgres is also much better today than then as well. What situations is Mongo better than Postgres? Why choose Mongo in 2025?

Mongo is real distributed and scalable DB, while postgres is single server DB, so main consideration could be if you need to scale beyond single server.

It's sad that this was downvoted. It's literally true. MongoDB vs. vanilla Postgres is not in Postgres' favor with respect to horizontal scaling. It's the same situation with Postgres vs. MySQL.

That being said there are plenty of ways to shard Postgres that are free, e.g. Citus. It's also questionable whether many need sharding. You can go a long way with simply a replica.

Postgres also has plenty of its own strengths. For one, you can get a managed solution without being locked into MongoDB the company.

Re: MongoDB acquires Voyage AI

#86

Post by beAbU »

jamesrr39 wrote: post #67

Genuine question: I appreciate the comments about MongoDB being much better than it was 10 years ago; but Postgres is also much better today than then as well. What situations is Mongo better than Postgres? Why choose Mongo in 2025?

Mongo is Web scale.

Re: MongoDB acquires Voyage AI

#87

Post by koakuma-chan »

jamesrr39 wrote: post #67

Genuine question: I appreciate the comments about MongoDB being much better than it was 10 years ago; but Postgres is also much better today than then as well. What situations is Mongo better than Postgres? Why choose Mongo in 2025?

Choose Mongo if you need web scale.

Re: MongoDB acquires Voyage AI

#88

Post by threeseed »

amazingamazing wrote: post #85
riku_iki wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Mongo is real distributed and scalable DB, while postgres is single server DB, so main consideration could be if you need to scale beyond single server.

It's sad that this was downvoted. It's literally true. MongoDB vs. vanilla Postgres is not in Postgres' favor with respect to horizontal scaling. It's the same situation with Postgres vs. MySQL. That being said there are plenty of ways to shard Postgres that are free, e.g. Citus. It's also questionable whether many need sharding. You can go a long way with simply a replica. Postgres also has plenty of its own strengt…

Citus is owned by Microsoft.

And history has not been nice to startups like this continuing their products over the long term.

It's why unless it is built-in and supported it's not feasible for most to depend on it.

Re: MongoDB acquires Voyage AI

#89

Post by scosman »

threeseed wrote: post #84
scosman wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A) Postgres easily scales to billions of rows without breaking a sweat. After that shard. It’s definitely negotiable.

So does a text file. Statements like yours are meaningless when you aren't specific about the operations, schema, access patterns etc. If you have a single server, relational use case then PostgreSQL is great. But like all technology it's not great at everything.

The use a text file.

In all seriousness, calling Postgres’ scalability “not-negotiable for most use cases” is wild.

Re: MongoDB acquires Voyage AI

#90

Post by amazingamazing »

threeseed wrote: post #88
amazingamazing wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's sad that this was downvoted. It's literally true. MongoDB vs. vanilla Postgres is not in Postgres' favor with respect to horizontal scaling. It's the same situation with Postgres vs. MySQL. That being said there are plenty of ways to shard Postgres that are free, e.g. Citus. It's also questionable whether many need sharding. You can go a long way with simply a replica. Postgres also has plenty of its own strengt…

Citus is owned by Microsoft. And history has not been nice to startups like this continuing their products over the long term. It's why unless it is built-in and supported it's not feasible for most to depend on it.

that's fair, but that's true of mongodb itself too. I wouldn't count that against either of them.
Post reply on HN