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

Does everyone hate MongoDB?

blog.serverdensity.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 159 posts

Re: Does everyone hate MongoDB?

#131

Post by mitchty »

xaa wrote: post #126
pooriaazimi wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I haven't got a 32 bit version of Mongo, but people pointed out in the other thread that 32-bit version of mongod displays a little warning every time you start it saying it can handle only 2GB of data. Can you confirm this ( because I don't have the 32-bit version installed )? It still stinks, especially because it "silently failed after hitting the threshold", but I personally would feel better about 10gen if this…

Why are people running 32-bit OSes in 2012 again?

I run one on my phone daily? Why are you asking a question with an obvious answer of: not everything is 64 bits yet.

Re: Does everyone hate MongoDB?

#132

Post by res0nat0r »

diego wrote: post #77
werkshy wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is true, in the Ubuntu packages this is printed to the default log at /var/log/mongodb/mongodb.log. It is also abundantly clear from the documentation. I struggle to understand how one could deploy a new datastore in production without reading the "getting started" level of documentation or looking in the log at some point. The 2GB 32-bit limit of MongoDB seems like a complete non-issue to me. Wed Sep 19 17:29:2…

Normally people look at logs when things go wrong. Do you look at the log anytime something starts successfully and seems to be working? You must spend lots of time looking at logs. This is a message that MUST be displayed on the console when you install the server for the first time. It's too important. Also, you learn a tool before going into production. I never went into "production" with mongodb. All I did was ex…

Then this whole post sounds like a non issue. You couldn't be bothered to even look at the log file for your app because it wasn't important enough, then you shouldn't be irate when it doesn't work as expected.

Re: Does everyone hate MongoDB?

#134

Post by Daishiman »

nc17 wrote: post #100
jeremyjh wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe you should learn something from your failure.

You have been a "technology manager" at Bank of America in North Carolina since 1998. Do you try new technologies such as MongoDB professionally? What are your qualifications to make such a vague statement? More importantly, what is the lesson to be learned?

You do know he sold search and indexing startup to LinkedIn, including a custom storage backend?

Re: Does everyone hate MongoDB?

#135

Post by Devilboy »

taligent wrote: post #112
Devilboy wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The fact that you base your impression of MongoDB based on ZERO evidence just conjecture that the slowness of their site is database related says a lot about you too. There are many other reasons it could equally be: app server, network etc. Those other things are trivial to fix (e.g. add more app servers) so I too think that it's safe to assume it's probably the data store's fault. > But it does 'just work' that's…

None of what you said makes ANY sense. Have you ever actually scaled an app before ? Adding more app servers increases the number of requests you can handle. It doesn't make slow apps or latency faster. Both of those are possible causes for why certain requests may be slower. It's not necessarily a database problem. > Did you read the article? Yes. I read the documentation before installing MongoDB so I haven't had a…

There's no reason other than the data store that would make their site that slow. Yes I have experience in this area. Until they come out and tell me otherwise I'm gonna bet that the data store is at fault. I could be wrong but I'm willing to give you 5 to 1 odds against.

Re: Does everyone hate MongoDB?

#136

Post by kaiwen1 »

I'm not sure I "hate" it. But every project I've used MongoDB on that grew the least bit of data complexity left me wishing for (and often converting to) Postgres. I'll still like MongoDB if I'm doing something very simple or rapid prototyping, etc. But for real work, forget it.

Re: Does everyone hate MongoDB?

#137

Post by Klinky »

tedunangst wrote: post #62
pooriaazimi wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I haven't got a 32 bit version of Mongo, but people pointed out in the other thread that 32-bit version of mongod displays a little warning every time you start it saying it can handle only 2GB of data. Can you confirm this ( because I don't have the 32-bit version installed )? It still stinks, especially because it "silently failed after hitting the threshold", but I personally would feel better about 10gen if this…

Just installed it on ubuntu 32-bit (apt-get install mongodb). I now have a 32-bit mongodb process running. Minus all of the noise from apt about setting up xulrunner and the 101(!!!) other dependent packages, here's the entirety of the startup messages I see: mongodb start/running, process 13660

Any app that has a warning message will fail to warn you if it's output is rerouted to a log file. This sounds more like an issue with the package maintainers not understanding the limitation and thus not putting in a warning message post install.

Re: Does everyone hate MongoDB?

#138

Post by krzyk »

jeremyjh wrote: post #102
diego wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe you should make constructive comments instead of making assumptions about what people learn or don't (or what they know or don't, or what has worked for them or hasn't). There are some really disrespectful people in this community.

I didn't say you didn't learn anything. But you seem to be making excuses for why you shouldn't know some very basic things about MongoDB. It uses a memory-mapped file. How can that be larger than 2GB in 32-bit system? It has async writes...this is pretty well documented by 10gen and is also something noted by a lot of tutorials, blog articles etc. You should have known something this basic about a database so import…

Come on, database (or any other system) that just silently fails to add new data?

2GB limit is clearly mentioned in the logs, that's fine, but anyone that sees this would expect that DB would start "screaming" loudly wherever it can (logs, response to the user on EVERY communication with the server, during any select,insert and others) that it reached this limit.

Re: Does everyone hate MongoDB?

#139

Post by krzyk »

xaa wrote: post #126
pooriaazimi wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I haven't got a 32 bit version of Mongo, but people pointed out in the other thread that 32-bit version of mongod displays a little warning every time you start it saying it can handle only 2GB of data. Can you confirm this ( because I don't have the 32-bit version installed )? It still stinks, especially because it "silently failed after hitting the threshold", but I personally would feel better about 10gen if this…

Why are people running 32-bit OSes in 2012 again?

Why would I need that when I have When comparing e.g. 32bit firefox and 64bit one, the first runs much smoother on my system. So if I didn't have 8GB I would install 32bit system. (not to mention that all binaries take less space)

Re: Does everyone hate MongoDB?

#140

Post by perbu »

narag wrote: post #90
krobertson wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree. In some regards it is "oversold", but I also think part of that is from a lot of the marketing efforts we've seen with newer databases like Mongo and even Riak. I am not saying those are bad, but with more established DBs like MySQL and PostgreSQL, you never really saw the same kind of marketing efforts towards developers, startups, etc. It is kind of a newer concept.

...with more established DBs like MySQL and PostgreSQL, you never really saw the same kind of marketing efforts towards developers, startups, etc. It is kind of a newer concept. That's funny because MySQL used to do exactly the same kind of marketing fifteen years ago: comparing itself to Oracle, "it's a thousand times faster" when it obviously didn't do one thousandth of what a RDBMS does. History repeats... and has…

I don't think that is correct. They never compared themselves to Oracle. I spent some time with Monty parts of the team and also tried working with their business side and they never went after the Oracle workloads. Their huge popularity come with the LAMP stack and their ease of use. They went after this along with data warehousing.
Post reply on HN