No, we have migrated prototypes to redshift. You just need to keep your database logic in a separate layer, which is something one should do anyway. I say "I think" because I agree with you that most will not. If you implement mongo such that you will be stuck on mongo, then do not use it. You always want to have a layer that handles your database operations, with any database, but obviously you are safer in SQL-land as switching costs are lower.

I do not think the "cancer" metaphor is valuable here. What you describe are bad ideas that I agree are bad ideas but really one has to know the tool they are using and what it is bad at.

I think the thing you describe can happen but that is just poor planning more than anything. Why does the database have anything to do with the design of your API layer? That sounds bonkers. And I would not blame the underlying database tech. I would blame the implementer.

But really, please consider that many of us have, or are as we speak, losing loved ones to a deadly sickness which you have compared to a poor database implementation.

But the technology encourages this type of behavior. And I am not speaking of hypothetical "can happen". I very recently had to deal with this precise issue.

> But really, please consider that many of us have, or are as we speak, losing loved ones to a deadly sickness which you have compared to a poor database implementation.

Sorry for your loss. Use of the word for non-medical concerns is common. Mongo Metastasis works too.

Again disagree regarding "poor database implementation". Trivializing the "database implementation" is precisely Mongo's value proposition and the very reason they got their market share.

I agree that it is very easy to make bad decisions with this product, but I do not think it is unique to Mongo. And it is the role of a good architect or a good team lead to make sure that this does not happen or that developers do not go down these roads.

I would even say the strengths that I have pointed out are precisely what makes it easier to take shortcuts. It gets out of your way, makes collections if they do not exist, allows for different document types in the same collections. It has no guard rails whatsoever.

I think we are in agreement -- one needs to be very careful using this. You can use it and put yourself in a spot where you have to throw out your entire codebase.

Well, me saying "can happen" does not mean it does not happen or that people have not seen it. It is saying the opposite. My point is it does not have to or that it does not always happen.

Developers take shortcuts, often because they do not know better, and you are right that some products make it easier to go down these roads.

I still do not think you want to use medical diseases as metaphors. You would not say "mongo aids" or "mongo alzheimers" or "mongo diabetes." Even if it is common, it is not particularly useful. Metastasis is better.

A happy conclusion. We're in general agreement.