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

“MongoDB is dead. Long live Postgresql”

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 160 posts

Re: “MongoDB is dead. Long live Postgresql”

#41

Post by TheZenPsycho »

egeozcan wrote: post #28
busterarm wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I really would love it if somebody could go back in HN-Time and track the data on Mongo posts & comments. I've always been slightly skeptical about it, but it always seemed to me that there was a long love affair with it overall. Then people started voicing their frustrations and the community was divided and now it looks acrimonious for everyone.

Is there an algorithm which measures negativity in a given text? Considering the level of grammatical errors and sarcasm involved, one would need a really complicated system, I'd bet. A google search brought me to Sentiment Analysis page on Wikipedia[0], which, after the initial skimming, doesn't seem to link to any implementations. [0]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sentiment_analysis

I know of one implementation: http://nltk.org

Re: “MongoDB is dead. Long live Postgresql”

#42

Post by aidenn0 »

jmngomes wrote: post #35
trekky1700 wrote: post #31

This just makes me wonder why they chose Mongo in the first place. It sounds like they didn't really consider their needs when initially choosing databases. Mongo has some benefits that when properly implemented far outweigh the negatives. At the same time, it's still relatively young, and doesn't have the "maturity of process" that makes older SQL engines so easy to manage/implement. Eventually, I'm sure, Mongo will…

Because 1) a lot of startups seem to choose "startup technology", i.e. whatever famous startups are using, just because it seems fashionable and/or they don't consider if it'll actually solve their specific problem; or 2) they're technically curious and end up using it just for fun, even if it's not a good fit for their problem. I've seen people using Redis for their MVPs, which is hardly necessary to serve 100 or 10…

As far as Redis goes, is there really much of anything in the space between bdb style KV stores and Redis? If you have design reasons for wanting your KV store in a separate process, why not use Redis?

Re: “MongoDB is dead. Long live Postgresql”

#43

Post by jeffdavis »

functional_test wrote: post #19

Seriously, another case of using Mongo incorrectly? I want to believe all the Mongo hate, but I can't because I always find out that the actual problem was one or more of: * didn't read the manual * poor schema * didn't maintain the database (compactions, etc.) In this case, they hit several: " Its volume on disk is growing 3-4 times faster than the real volume of data it store;" They should be doing compactions and…

> They should be doing compactions and are not.

https://jira.mongodb.org/browse/SERVER-11763

It looks like compaction is an offline process. That really puts the user between a rock and a hard place.

Re: “MongoDB is dead. Long live Postgresql”

#44

Post by cullenking »

Maybe I am just incredibly lucky, but mongodb has worked fine for ridewithgps.com - we are sitting at 670gb of data in mongo (actual DB size, indexes included) and haven't had a problem. Replica sets have been fantastic, I wish there was another DB out there that did auto-failover as cleanly/easily as mongo does. We've had a few server crashes of our primary, and aside from 1-2 seconds or so of errors as requests come in before the secondary is promoted, it's transparent.

With that being said, we are using it to store our JSON geo track data, most everything else is in a mysql database. As a result we haven't run into limitations around the storage/query model that some other people might be experiencing.

Additionally, we have some serious DB servers so haven't felt the pain of performance when exceeding working memory. 192gb of ram with 8 RAID10 512gb SSDs probably masks performance issues that other people are feeling.

Final note: I'll probably be walking away from mongo, due to the natural evolution of our stack. We'll store high fidelity track data as gzipped flat files of JSON, and a reduced track inside of postgis.

tl;dr - using mongo as a very simple key/value store for data that isn't updated frequently, which could easily be replaced by flat file storage, is painless. YMMV with other use cases.

Re: “MongoDB is dead. Long live Postgresql”

#45

Post by randomdata »

jtchang wrote: post #34
functional_test wrote: post #19

Seriously, another case of using Mongo incorrectly? I want to believe all the Mongo hate, but I can't because I always find out that the actual problem was one or more of: * didn't read the manual * poor schema * didn't maintain the database (compactions, etc.) In this case, they hit several: " Its volume on disk is growing 3-4 times faster than the real volume of data it store;" They should be doing compactions and…

> * didn't read the manual > * poor schema > * didn't maintain the database (compactions, etc.) The real world dictates that this happens more often than not. You know why I like Postgres? When I don't read the manual, create a crappy schema, and forgot to maintain the database it STILL seems to work okay.

To be fair, Postgres has automatic vacuuming now, but it is a relatively new feature. Both projects seem to agree that it is not a high-priority item, though there is certainly something to be said about using a mature product, which Mongo is most certainly not.

Your comment has made me quite curious to know what people using mature databases of the time were saying about Postgres 19 years ago, when it was roughly the same age Mongo is today.

Re: “MongoDB is dead. Long live Postgresql”

#46

Post by pilif »

The title is a bit misleading. This is basically an announcement of a fork of Errbit that has Postgres support. Additionally, the fork was announced as an issue on errbit with no discussion or as an official pull request.

I would not consider this good etiquette. If you fork your project (especially without discussing the intention first), adding a bug to the original project isn't a very nice thing to do.

An official pull request would be nicer or, even better, don't bother the original project, but just announce your fork over other channels.

Even better would be to at least discuss the issue with the original project - maybe they agree and you can work together.

Re: “MongoDB is dead. Long live Postgresql”

#47

Post by jmngomes »

aidenn0 wrote: post #42
jmngomes wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because 1) a lot of startups seem to choose "startup technology", i.e. whatever famous startups are using, just because it seems fashionable and/or they don't consider if it'll actually solve their specific problem; or 2) they're technically curious and end up using it just for fun, even if it's not a good fit for their problem. I've seen people using Redis for their MVPs, which is hardly necessary to serve 100 or 10…

As far as Redis goes, is there really much of anything in the space between bdb style KV stores and Redis? If you have design reasons for wanting your KV store in a separate process, why not use Redis?

I agree with your point, my example was about using Redis for performance reasons when designing/building an MVP, a stage where you are unlikely to have a (real) performance problem.

Re: “MongoDB is dead. Long live Postgresql”

#49

Post by Xorlev »

trekky1700 wrote: post #31

This just makes me wonder why they chose Mongo in the first place. It sounds like they didn't really consider their needs when initially choosing databases. Mongo has some benefits that when properly implemented far outweigh the negatives. At the same time, it's still relatively young, and doesn't have the "maturity of process" that makes older SQL engines so easy to manage/implement. Eventually, I'm sure, Mongo will…

MongoDB is easy. I'll be the first one to spit-roast MongoDB with war stories, but the biggest benefit I keep coming back to is ease of use for a developer. It's very easy to change your data model and rapidly iterate.

As soon as your project starts to solidify, the main benefit of MongoDB is gone.

It still lives in some of my personal projects (e.g. <100mb of data, because even flat files can't mess that up).

Re: “MongoDB is dead. Long live Postgresql”

#50

Post by jvvlimme »

If you want to use MongoDB in a project and you don't intend to rely heavily on the aggregation framework, the consider TokuMX (http://www.tokutek.com/products/tokumx-for-mongodb/) as it alleviates many of the shortcomings of MongoDB (data compression, document level locking for writes, ...) + it adds transactions.

It's a drop in replacement so it will work with current drivers. (if you have a running mongo cluster however expect quite some work if you want to migrate)

(I have no affiliation with TokuTek whatsoever except that I use their product)

Post reply on HN