2014-04-25 6:30 GMT-03:00 Norbert Hartl <norb...@hartl.name>: > MongoDB is good at indexing geo > spatial stuff. So mongo + voyage is a good fit for this. I need to do > explicit commits and have to do additional house keeping both of them you > don’t need to do in GemStone. But I get the indexing capability I need. We > also do statistical aggregation of data. I used to do it with mongo and > map-reduce jobs at night but it is cumbersome. Now I use elasticsearch for > that because I can put in JSON and I get rich and fast query cababilities. > So my choices of persistence are always driven by the use case (any my > laziness of course)
JSON is the new lingua franca of databases (and almost everything else), as SQL was before. Aside from pros/cons of ORM and NoSQL, there is a real explosion of NoSQL ecosystem things like ElasticSearch, Lucene, etc, and everybody speaks JSON. At the infrastructure level most of the benefits of NoSQL come from solving the Availability and Partitioning from the CAP Theorem. Truth is... most of us don't have issues dealing with partitioning. I ran a system with millions of rows which were perfectly handled by a single database server, and even using replicas for off-site quering or backup. Making silly analogies, NoSQL is to RDBMS what JSON is to XML. Both have their place, but most of the times the latter is overkill/convoluted. Regards,
