Hacker News Reader

That only makes sense if you wanted to store relational data in a NoSQL database (and that's not what Mongo is meant to do)

View on HN

I'm genuinely curious what you mean when you say "relational data"? I've seen this phrase thrown around and I think it's something of a misconception.

The way you use the term implies that you're referring to the type of data, but the term generally refers to the method used for storing the data.

This distinction is important because it leads to a circular reasoning dynamic: many of us are accustomed to storing the data in tabular form using a relational data model. But choosing to use that particular model to represent objects or entities or ideas does not make those objects or entities or ideas fundamentally relational data.

And if your business is okay with all of your data living in a single instance.

Because PostgreSQL is unacceptably poor at HA/replication compared to MongoDB.

Is that really true these days? Setting up Postgres read replicas with automatic fail over across multiple machines is pretty trivial in the cloud with services like RDS, spanner etc. And although doing it in your own datacenter is still a big job it's far from impossible.

Huh? Replicas are easy, and hot standby nodes aren’t that hard either. There are also various active-active solutions if you need that.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com