Chronological Thread 

< Chronological >      < Thread >

---

Hey Mitar!

I recently stumbled upon an article by Sarah Mei [1] where she explains
why you should never use MongoDB (worth reading!). In the paragraph
titled 'is there no hope?' she explains that fetching related documents
is bad because you have to do it 'manually'.

With PeerDB, these relations can be modeled nicely and fetching the
related documents takes place on the server. Now I've got 2 questions:

1. Have you ever measured the performance of PeerDB? Sarah raises
several concerns in her article, one of which addresses caching. Are
PeerDB's results cached in any way?

2. Does PeerDB respect the 'fields' option of 'find' in an efficient
way? E.g., does it only fetch a related document if it is necessary?

cheers,
André


[1]
http://www.sarahmei.com/blog/2013/11/11/why-you-should-never-use-mongodb/

--
Homepage http://page.math.tu-berlin.de/~gaul
github https://github.com/andrenarchy
Twitter https://twitter.com/#!/andrenarchy
Diaspora https://diasp.org/u/andrenarchy
(you won't find me on facebook!)
Jabber

PGP Key 0x0FA9170E

---

• [PeerLibrary dev] PeerDB performance and fields selector, André Gaul, 08/22/2014
  • Re: [PeerLibrary dev] PeerDB performance and fields selector, Mitar, 08/22/2014
    • Re: [PeerLibrary dev] PeerDB performance and fields selector, Mitar, 08/23/2014

---

Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.18.