Am 14.11.09 23:33, schrieb Shane Hathaway:

> >
> > I think that by "very critical", the MongoDB authors are referring to 
> > applications that must not allow conflicting updates.  Conflict 
> > resolution is probably my main concern with all of these new databases. 
> >   I have no doubts about ZODB's conflict resolution policy, while I can 
> > imagine a variety of different policies these other databases might 
> > implement.  A "four or five dimensional hash" like Cassandra might even 
> > have a conflict resolution policy that changes with every release.
My high-level comment:

choose the right tool for each individual problem. We have been building
hybrid applications on top of Zope using the ZODB and a RDBMS for years.
I can imagine building a Web-2.0-ish application on top of a RDBMS for
storing personal data (where transaction integration is a must) and
using something
like MongoDB for mass-data. You have to analyze which data are "important"
and which are "less important" and then choose the related backend.

To MongoDB: I made lots of tests with MongoDB lately and found it pretty
amazing, fast and reliable. Especially the replication support looks good
and the sharding functionality (although still alpha or beta) appears
promising. But the speed has its price: only atomicity for single
document entities.


Andreas Jung <> < <>>
ZOPYX Ltd. & Co. KG

<<attachment: lists.vcf>>

For more information about ZODB, see the ZODB Wiki:

ZODB-Dev mailing list  -

Reply via email to