Which is why it doesn't make any sense to claim that using MongoDB somehow eliminates needing to migrate your data as it evolves.
Which is why it doesn't make any sense to claim that using MongoDB somehow eliminates needing to migrate your data as it evolves.
Sometimes you have to do update of records with a certain version number.
My opinions, for the record: MongoDB is a tool with some use cases. I'm more of an SQL+Memcache guy, if possible, but not religiously if a good argument is presented (that don't sound like "let's use .*, I want another keyword on my cv").
And since this is supposed to aid in rapid prototyping, how does it do so? It seems to me that it does just the opposite by introducing a significant and totally unnecessary burden.
(An update routine can be run at any point with low use like Xmas, etc. This is potentially neat, depending on use statistics.)
I'm not saying this is a common thing, but the lack of joins makes the data a bit more flexible -- this can't be too much, if nothing else because then the Javascript will begin to break.
(I do think there are much more use cases for nosql than as a Memcached with more features. Where an old job used MongoDB wasn't one.)