Curious, why do you use Mongo? Does it give you something that a JSONB column in Postgres wouldn’t?
An example of an issue I am dealing with currently: while you can create a gin index to speed up containment queries, Postgres doesn’t keep any statistics about jsonb columns. This means the query planner will sometimes do stupid things, like using the index even for very non-selective overlap conditions, which is a lot slower than just doing a sequential scan.
Less of an issue for me but worth considering: the size of the gin index in my use case seems to be about 5x bigger than the size of the unindexed data. I was surprised by the size increase. I only use the containment operator so I could make a smaller/faster index using the jsonb_path_ops operator class. This is on my todo list :)
Like all non-btree indexes in Postgres, the index is unordered. That means sorting by values in the jsonb column will always be slow. This doesn’t matter for selective queries, but exacerbates my already slow non-selective queries that return large result sets.
That said, if your queries are selective, jsonb + gin indexes are surprisingly performant (in the 0.5-10ms range for small result sets). My use case is a mix of structured relational data with jsonb for user-defined values (which of course they want to use for querying/sorting and I was dumb enough to say “sure, why not?”)
In terms of the magnitude of data, there’s roughly 10 million rows. Each team using this service has the query scoped to about 500k-1 million records, and then additional filters (on the jsonb column) will scope that down to anywhere between 60k-0 results.
I ask because where I work we sync postgres to a secondary store for search, but the way it's done in a piecemeal, application-specific way gives me the heebie jeebies. It almost certainly will result in that secondary store drifting. Unfortunately we can't use something like zombodb [1] as we're on amazon RDS. It seems like you know your stuff, and seeing non-deterministic consistency irritates the heck out of me!
- Proper replication in its first-class, default configuration
- Automatically managed cluster membership
- Seamless automated failover
- First-class async client libraries in many languages
- A non-awful query language
Focusing on the JSON is beside the point (though it is a convenience). Wake me up when you've got a properly distributed database.
But I'll be happy to replace it by something else, my load is extremely small and only single requirement is to have DB as network daemon, not as embedded storage as it will be used by 2 applications (main daemon an API).
RethinkDB was really nice candidate for it but it's not alive anymore: https://rethinkdb.com/blog/rethinkdb-shutdown/
That said, I've incidentally heard a lot about Mongo in the last half a year. Might be my bubble. Might be MongoDB actually maturing and getting really good. I hope it's the latter.
For everyone else, JUP ("Just Use Postgres")
Snark aside, Postgres should hold you over for quite some time.
With Postgres you probably don't need Redis, Elastic Search, Mongo or Kafka.