I guess this was released from moderation by someone that didn't see your other email after you subscribed, let's consider this thread dead?
B. On 19 November 2013 21:16, Diogo Moitinho de Almeida <[email protected]> wrote: > Hello, > > Based on the research that I've done, CouchDB seems like a very good fit for > the problem I'm trying to solve, but when talking to people from within the > company, they're expressed that there are some unadvertised down sides to it > (though they tried using it 3 years ago) and that we would have to migrate > fairly quickly off of it. > > The worries that they expressed were: > 1. Scalability (with a stop the world lock when writing to disk). > 2. Erlang stack traces not being the easiest to deal with. (I assumed with > the "crash only" design, that common problems could be solved by restarting > a node). > 3. Garbage collection being a very slow process. > > And questions that I had were: > 1. Would anyone have approximate numbers on how it scales? In terms of > writes, size of the data, and cluster size? How big of a cluster have people > gotten working without issues? Have people tested this out in the petabyte > range? > 2. Would anyone have approximate times on how long a map reduce query could > take (with whatever sized data, I'm just curious)? > > The use that I'd be looking at is about 200 writes/second of documents <50 > kB each with updates fairly rarely, though if everything goes well, the > documents could be a bit larger with a more writes and a lot more updates. > > Thanks in advance for any help, > Diogo
