Hacker News Reader

Comment by marenkay | Hacker News Reader

Not trying to be sarcastic here but isn't this the case for most products in their early years and even for some that are "old"?

Every offering has its' issues but most of the time there is one feature that makes dealing with these worth it.

View on HN

That's the point. Using relational data in a non-relational system is just foolish, and introduces issues not worth dealing with. What exactly is MongoDB going to give you over PostgreSQL in that case?

Short-term: quick to get started. Long-term? A plan to migrate to PostgreSQL.

Honestly, spinning up a SQL server really isn't rocket science. SQL is easier to read and write than that messy mongo query language. Though, if you're used to taking the quick and dirty route for everything, you're probably using ORMs anyhow. But why do things twice? Just do it right the first time.

Most products don't trash data and ignore almost every real-world usecase.

MongoDB is a marketing meme that slowly has had a database built around it.

There was perhaps even still is the idea out there to shave off some engineering time by ditching established principles engineers followed for the past 50 years.

Personally I think the idea for MongoDB is not that bad. It's just not one that works for business scenarios, where traditional principles are mandatory.

There are some things I really like about it. The pattern-matching-esque syntax for queries, for example, is quite neat. The ability to do certain type of data munging, the easy use of JS to handle certain things, all good.

But, the bread-and-butter business stuff has continually left me disappointed and sometimes working way harder than needed.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com