MongoDB seems to be going through the same phases that MySQL did about 10 years ago with the 3.x series. It's interesting to see the progression and I look forward to these improvements but there seems to be so many other choices out there, although at the small level, not nearly as easy to use.
Document-level locking and compression come to MongoDB
11–13 of 13 posts
Re: Document-level locking and compression come to MongoDB
#12Nice to see WiredTiger getting some love. LevelDB gets all the credit these days (and LMDB to a [much] lesser extent).
What is WiredTiger? I checked the github, but couldn't find any high level information other than it uses a LSM much like LevelDB. What advantages/tradeoffs have they made in WiredTiger vs. LevelDB?
TFA links to http://www.wiredtiger.com/ which have some bold claims and jolly graphs -- and a link to: https://github.com/wiredtiger/wiredtiger
I hadn't heard of wiredtiger either. Looks interesting. Anyone know how it compares to LMDB[1]? Both in terms of features and maturity? Apparently made by the people that gave the world the Sleepycat Berkley DB.
Re: Document-level locking and compression come to MongoDB
#13mangoDB ( https://github.com/dcramer/MangoDB ) has significantly faster writes than MongoDB. On a serious note, Postgres 9.3 with the JSON data type is quite comparable to MongoDB these days.
The most appealing feature of many NoSQL databases, for me, is their ability to automatically shard and replicate data across multiple instances. It is possible to do this with relational databases such as Postgresql, but it is not easy from my experience. Also failover and balancing sharded data are not things that are easy with relational databases.