Goodbye global lock – MongoDB 2.0 vs 2.2

[mitchellh]

They've moved from a _process_ level lock to a _database_ level lock. Let's take a moment to golf clap their mediocrity. golf clap

Use a real database.

[bsg75]

I am a Real Database(tm) person, but I will give them some credit for:

"Nevertheless, a major focus for the upcoming 2.2 release has been removing the global lock and introducing database level locking as an initial step towards collection level locking and potentially even more granular concurrency in future releases."

This stuff is hard to get right, and why RDBMS' are simultaneously maligned as "old tech", yet are still the most dependable database mechanisms available.

It seems like the successful(popular) "NoSQL" engines will eventually reinvent many RDBMS wheels - at least in the cases where they are aiming to be replacements.

[scottostler]

If you take a look at the benchmarks further down the page, the real improvement seems to be that mongo does a better job of yielding during page faults. That provides an improvement even with a single database.

[DenisM]

No need to be snarky, but I certainly share your general sentiment:

http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3412386

[taligent]

And they've indicated that in the next stable release they will have collection level locking. All moving towards sub collection locking.

It is a relatively new database and they trying to make changes in small increments to ensure they don't break anything.

Seems prudent to me.

[peterbe]

Well done 10gen peeps! Keep up the good work. You deserve all the credit you can get. There's still a lot of work to do to catch up with established RDBMSes but you're definitely getting a bunch of things right already today.

[timmyd]

i guess then in some respects - its funny how correct Adam was in his comments

http://www.quora.com/Quora-Infrastructure/Why-does-Quora-use...

[scorpioxy]

"10gen do not provide official benchmarks because they tend to be irrelevant to real world usage."

Anybody else thing this sentence is silly? I definitely do not base my judgement on a tool off its artificial benchmarks but I do check them to see if an upgrade is worth it or not. Irrelevant or not, please publish them.

I'm a mongo user(for offline analytics) so any improvement in performance will be good.

[Karunamon]

>Anybody else thing this sentence is silly?

Not really. It's a lose/lose proposition to publish benchmarks, especially on something that's so environment and dataset dependent. Either real world performance is way below the benchmark leading to all kinds of storm and strife, or way above and then you lose credibility and people wondered why you bother anyways.

[facorreia]

Damn, when I glanced upon the title I thought it was about Python's GIL.

[slurgfest]

What actual use case do you have that CPython's GIL is affecting in any serious way? And if you do have a real case which somehow requires the removal of the GIL, why don't you just use Jython, which has no GIL and recently released an implementation of Python 2.7?

[onetwothreefour]

These posts (the one about 20ms for a memcached lookup especially) make me doubt the technical prowess of the entire ServerDensity staff, and thereby stopping me from ever considering this product.