> The article is about handling MongoDB if it grows above 100GB. It gives me the impression that scaling MongoDB to that size is a serious issue.
I don't think so. It gives me the impression that 10gen (MongoDb Inc.) has made a mistake how to present "handling MongoDb over 100GB".
> example: global write lock up to release 2.2
Why are we still talking about this? It's not global write lock any more, okay? Stating previous inefficiencies doesn't bring much value to the table.
> At this point it was inevitable to see MongoDB as a popular, yet poor representative of it’s species.
Show me the real arguments! Show me the real arguments!