I have an app who has large documents that are saved each time someone modifies it... since is not a frequent operation, the app performs really well. why would be strange? a document is not more than a bunch of dictionaries... of course in certain cases you can optimize, but most of the time you don'y need it.
Esteban On Mar 8, 2013, at 8:59 AM, Sabine Knöfel <[email protected]> wrote: > Please have a look at http://docs.mongodb.org/manual/applications/update/ > > "The update() method can either replace the existing document with the new > document* or update specific fields in the existing document.*" > > "Modifier Operators" such as $set, are performed in the context of the > database and not at the client. > > See also here (german): > http://books.google.de/books?id=6wAJLJRxFt8C&pg=PA156&lpg=PA156&dq=%22Modifier-Operatoren+und+die+damit+%22+MongoDB&source=bl&ots=1VdUhW6VEG&sig=_wG4cMTzZnngpHFEYPt3tLO8-40&hl=de&sa=X&ei=LJg5UYUY0cO0Bv3agbgJ&ved=0CEgQ6AEwAg#v=onepage&q=%22Modifier-Operatoren%20und%20die%20damit%20%22%20MongoDB&f=false > > In this book, the autor writes, that you will go to database hell, if you > always update the whole document instead of single fields. :-) > > What are the experiences of bigger projects using MongoTalk - do you always > write the *whole *collection? What about the performance with this solution? > Is this feasible? It sounds strange to me. > > > > -- > View this message in context: > http://forum.world.st/does-MongoTalk-implement-modifier-operators-e-g-set-tp4675511p4675675.html > Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >
