Live data from Hacker News

Think before you Mongo

blog.runnable.com

31–40 of 101 posts

Re: Think before you Mongo

#31
post #9

like the yesterday's submission of "Why you should never use MongoDB (2013)" ( https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12290739 ), this is all just plain sad because totally unnecessary: the failure of hierarchical databases was obvious in 1960s and was the background of Edgar F. Codd's work on the relational model. unfortunately, this industry is dominated by cocky PFYs (of any age) convinced they don't need to study h…

^ this.

To be fair, though, it is genuinely difficult to gauge which technologies are worth adopting. Clearly some are, otherwise we'd all still be writing hand-crafted assembler to optimize drum memory I/O, or perhaps heaps of Perl CGI scripts.

It's also unrealistic to expect the average programmer - hell, even the pretty good programmer - to be aware of 50+ years of relevant research. For starters, many of them can't even access the relevant papers without paying some gatekeeper a whole lot for the privilege. If they could, they'd need a significant investment of time to understand them, especially without ready access to domain experts who can tell them which papers are most worth reading and in which order. (All of these are benefits of graduate student life that are often taken for granted.)

Re: Think before you Mongo

#32
post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right tool for the right job. Thinking RDBMS is a silver bullet is just as bad as thinking a document database is a silver bullet. There is room in the world for both.

but we're not talking about silver bullets: we're talking about models which let you derive most information from your data. mathematics says you will get the most bang for your buck from the relational model. if you like hierarchical databases (data trees), consider that relational database gives you a forest: you can treat any datum as your tree root and bloom from there. with hierarchical, you're tied to a single…

Speed of development and execution when I don't, and will likely never need, to query that way.

I argue you ignored the silver bullet criticism and then immediately doubled down on SQL as the silver bullet.

Re: Think before you Mongo

#34
Are there any key/value JSON databases that enforce JSON Schema (or some other schema language)? That seems way better to me in situations where you actually care about data integrity.

Re: Think before you Mongo

#35
post #9

like the yesterday's submission of "Why you should never use MongoDB (2013)" ( https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12290739 ), this is all just plain sad because totally unnecessary: the failure of hierarchical databases was obvious in 1960s and was the background of Edgar F. Codd's work on the relational model. unfortunately, this industry is dominated by cocky PFYs (of any age) convinced they don't need to study h…

what does PFYs stand for?

Re: Think before you Mongo

#36
post #9

like the yesterday's submission of "Why you should never use MongoDB (2013)" ( https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12290739 ), this is all just plain sad because totally unnecessary: the failure of hierarchical databases was obvious in 1960s and was the background of Edgar F. Codd's work on the relational model. unfortunately, this industry is dominated by cocky PFYs (of any age) convinced they don't need to study h…

what does PFYs stand for?

Pimply-Faced Youth :)

Re: Think before you Mongo

#37
post #31
post #9

like the yesterday's submission of "Why you should never use MongoDB (2013)" ( https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12290739 ), this is all just plain sad because totally unnecessary: the failure of hierarchical databases was obvious in 1960s and was the background of Edgar F. Codd's work on the relational model. unfortunately, this industry is dominated by cocky PFYs (of any age) convinced they don't need to study h…

^ this. To be fair, though, it is genuinely difficult to gauge which technologies are worth adopting. Clearly some are, otherwise we'd all still be writing hand-crafted assembler to optimize drum memory I/O, or perhaps heaps of Perl CGI scripts. It's also unrealistic to expect the average programmer - hell, even the pretty good programmer - to be aware of 50+ years of relevant research. For starters, many of them can…

Intuitively understanding the benefits of the relational model doesn't require access to scientific publications. Just a little bit of mathematical inclination and, most importantly, basic common sense.

Re: Think before you Mongo

#38
post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

but we're not talking about silver bullets: we're talking about models which let you derive most information from your data. mathematics says you will get the most bang for your buck from the relational model. if you like hierarchical databases (data trees), consider that relational database gives you a forest: you can treat any datum as your tree root and bloom from there. with hierarchical, you're tied to a single…

Speed of development and execution when I don't, and will likely never need, to query that way. I argue you ignored the silver bullet criticism and then immediately doubled down on SQL as the silver bullet.

> Speed of development and execution when I don't, and will likely never need, to query that way.

The initial joy and speed of of development is really nice. However, my experience has been you end up paying significant technical debt when the specs evolve faster than you think.

Re: Think before you Mongo

#39
post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

but we're not talking about silver bullets: we're talking about models which let you derive most information from your data. mathematics says you will get the most bang for your buck from the relational model. if you like hierarchical databases (data trees), consider that relational database gives you a forest: you can treat any datum as your tree root and bloom from there. with hierarchical, you're tied to a single…

Speed of development and execution when I don't, and will likely never need, to query that way. I argue you ignored the silver bullet criticism and then immediately doubled down on SQL as the silver bullet.

you ignored the silver bullet criticism

i don't think so, i simply refuse to have my arguments framed that way since i'm very well aware of the shortcomings present in what has so far passed for a "RDBMS". i consider velocitypsycho's argument ("Thinking RDBMS is a silver bullet is just as bad as thinking a document database is a silver bullet.") a non-sequitur: the former is a proper superset of the latter, that sentence simply "does not compute".

doubled down on SQL as the silver bullet

where does the post you replied to mention SQL? are you confusing SQL for the relational model?

Re: Think before you Mongo

#40

Are there any key/value JSON databases that enforce JSON Schema (or some other schema language)? That seems way better to me in situations where you actually care about data integrity.

That'd just be Postgres. When you need an schema you use a normal table, when you need arbitrary JSON data you use a JSON schema.
Post reply on HN