Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by mechanical_fish 5334 days ago
I assure you that, back when MySQL was the same age as Mongo is today, "don't use MySQL" was conventional wisdom... among those who could find and afford Oracle DBAs. ;)

(Though there weren't a lot of blog posts about it, because the word blog had not been invented yet; blogs developed along with... MySQL.)

It will be interesting to watch Mongo as it matures over the next ten years. Unlike MySQL, it is competing against ubiquitously-deployed, well-known, well-worn open-source RDBMS packages, so its history is unlikely to unfold in the same way that MySQL's did.
1 comments
einhverfr 5334 days ago
"Don't Use MySQL" still should be conventional wisdom.

Indeed it's the only database system I have ever used where a system with a single transaction running only multi-row inserts into a table can (and frequently does) deadlock against itself. Don't get me wrong, time was when it was easier to use than PostgreSQL but that time is long since passed.

One area I have continued to recommend MySQL has been in areas of content management but to be honest in many of these areas, NoSQL is actually a better fit.

link
tptacek 5334 days ago
Given the size and success of MySQL deployments, it's getting awfully hard to evangelize that particular religion. I prefer Postgres, but life is too short to argue about it.
link
einhverfr 5333 days ago
Ok, let me rephrase.

MySQL has a niche too. It's somewhere between that of a NoSQL database and that of a real RDBMS. MySQL does well for single app databases (as NoSQL does), but where the relational data then needs to be fed through other database systems for multi-app access.

link
tptacek 5333 days ago
It seems to do well for all of Facebook too, doesn't it?

I know Facebook seems banal because we interact with it in some way several times a week, but is your head wrapped around how huge that thing is?

link
chalst 5333 days ago
If Facebook are so happy with MySQL, why did they develop Cassandra?

Derek Harris puts the larger point about Facebook's trouble with MySQL: "By and large, [MySQL] does [for Facebook] what it’s designed to do, which is to keep up with the myriad status updates and other data that populate users’ profiles. Rather, [the problem is] that Facebook had to expend so much money and so many man-hours to get there."

http://gigaom.com/cloud/is-stonebraker-right-why-sql-isnt-th...

link
einhverfr 5333 days ago
It's not about the size of the database or deployment. It's about the number of applications interacting across the same relational interface. The fact that applications can turn off strict mode is a big blow in this area. You can't be sure your data is "obviously correct" to paraphrase a different HN post.

One of my customers logs certain web data into a MySQL database and loads/processes it in a PostgreSQL database every day. The data is then accessed in Pg by at least three different applications.

That's reasonable, btw.

link