News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:How Wired Is MongoDB and WiredTiger? by arthursilva on Thursday March 19, 2015 @03:47PM (#9234142)
Bench-marketing aside, I guess nobody ever expected MongoDB to outperform Couchbase. It's strengths are elsewhere, like the query language, secondary indexes and document model.
Re:How Wired Is MongoDB and WiredTiger? by skjhn on Thursday March 19, 2015 @04:41PM (#9234471)
That may be true, but they both have document models and Couchbase Server will have a complete query language based on SQL, secondary indexes, and support for joins.

http://docs.couchbase.com/developer/n1ql-dp4/n1ql-intro.html http://query.pub.couchbase.com/tutorial/#1

Re:How Wired Is MongoDB and WiredTiger? by arthursilva on Thursday March 19, 2015 @06:54PM (#9235128)
Precisely, but as of today the document model is limited (at least in comparison to Mongo). I'm following these developments for a while and I agree that they'll be killer!
Re:How Wired Is MongoDB and WiredTiger? by alittletooraph on Thursday March 19, 2015 @04:54PM (#9234543)
Is the report comparing 9 active couchbase nodes v 3 active mongodb nodes? Am I missing something here?
Re:How Wired Is MongoDB and WiredTiger? by skjhn on Thursday March 19, 2015 @05:18PM (#9234663)
It compares 9 nodes of Couchbase Server to 9 nodes of MongoDB. Couchbase Server reads and writes to every node, but MongoDB only reads and writes to primary nodes. That's the problem with active/passive topologies. MongoDB can read from secondary nodes but only if a) you don't require strong consistency or b) you don't mind degrading write performance - it would have to replicate to all secondaries nodes before the write finishes.