Re:MongoDB shares jump more than 30% in $192M IPO
by nemothekid on Thursday October 19, 2017 @05:02PM
(#15511540)
Redis makes very different promises than mongodb. Redis has always documented how exactly persistence works and how you could lose data. Redis' benchmarks arent dishonest. Redis isn't marketed as a SQL replacement nor as a primary data store.
I think most of HN would feel this way about, say, Redis. And Redis isn't "highest scale" or "most durable" or "most available" either. (Though it is pretty reliable.)
It's interesting, then, to compare the general impression people here have to MongoDB to the one they have of Redis. To me, Mongo is a "why use it when Postgres is just as easy to install", while Redis is exactly what I'd think of "to bootstrap a project, but three years later it's still running."
Is it just the slightly-different pitched use-cases of "working store" (Redis) vs "persistent store" (Mongo)? Is it that Redis still has its uses even when you've got Postgres there beside it, whereas Mongo doesn't so much (at least since Postgres got JSON columns)?