Misplaced Pages

Talk:MongoDB: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 05:51, 9 February 2012 edit203.99.208.3 (talk) →Drive-by tagging by Jasper Deng: new section← Previous edit Revision as of 05:56, 9 February 2012 edit undoJasper Deng (talk | contribs)Edit filter managers, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers53,787 edits Reverted to revision 451957703 by OsamaBinLogin: keep my name out of section headings. (TW)Next edit →
Line 28: Line 28:


] (]) 02:48, 23 September 2011 (UTC) ] (]) 02:48, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

== Drive-by tagging by Jasper Deng ==

Jasper Deng you're putting SEVEN tags on the article without providing any concrete reason. First time, you did not provide any reason. Second time, you said "definitely overbloated and its tone is highly inappropriate", without actually specifying how does that related to SEVEN different tags?

* It needs additional citations for verification. - article has SEVENTY-FIVE citations
* It is written like an advertisement and needs to be rewritten from a neutral point of view. - Give me a SINGLE sentence that's written like an advertisement.
* It contains instructions, advice, or how-to content. - The article has NOT A SINGLE SENTENCE which is instruction or how-to or advice.
* It may contain original research. - article has 75 citations and NEARLY EVERY SENTENCE is cited
* It may contain an excessive amount of intricate detail that may only interest a specific audience. - WHICH part? All the sections are necessary to describe a database software.
* It may contain wording that merely promotes the subject without imparting verifiable information. - WHICH senentence promotes the subject? Also, why are you putting both advert and promotion tags?
* It may be too technical for most readers to understand. Please help make it understandable to non-experts. WHICH part?

This is classic example of trying to defame the subject of the article using ] without actually making any effort to improve the article. ] (]) 05:51, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Revision as of 05:56, 9 February 2012

WikiProject iconComputer science Start‑class
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Computer science, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Computer science related articles on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Computer scienceWikipedia:WikiProject Computer scienceTemplate:WikiProject Computer scienceComputer science
StartThis article has been rated as Start-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
???This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
Things you can help WikiProject Computer science with:

 Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

name

says "from humongous" but I think it may also be a reference to Blazing Saddles. 173.164.238.54 (talk) 18:42, 21 December 2010 (UTC)


Single-Server Durability

I think the article would benefit from having a brief overview of the issues around MongoDB's lack of single-server durability. --Aimaz (talk) 09:23, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

As of version 1.8.0, MongoDB does have single-server durability.Beaddy1238 16:07, 13 May 2011 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Beaddy1238 (talk • contribs)
See . Removing lack of single server durability from article. Ochbad (talk) 01:37, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

Performance

Is there a reliable, third-party source that can provide some valid information about Mongo's actual performance? How does it relate and scale compared to widespred solutions like MySQL and other NoSQL databases? --IP 22:45, 7 July 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.56.90.168 (talk)

Timeless Specifics

There's a handful of sections that I thought were TOO detailed; specifically they listed things that will change over time, and it's not clear that this article will be updated to keep up. (even if YOU think that YOU will do it when the time comes.) These sections:

  • Language support
  • Monitoring
  • GUIs

for instance, Monitoring lists some current plugins. fine, but each is an independent project and at least one of the projects will run out of steam over the years; and at least one more, probably many, new plugins will show up. WP is not the place for these details; the Mongo group should maintain lists of what other attachable software is in what status, on their own site (or wherever it is, sourceforge or github...).

Instead of these complete lists, with meticulous links, you should just list a handful of the more prominent examples and refer people to Mongo's website for full details. EG language support. It's written in C++ so list C++; the mongo group would never give up that one no matter how threadbare they become. Then toss in a few server languages - those most likely to be used like PHP and Java. Then say "and, as of Sept 2011, about two dozen other languages". The detailed information should be in one place: the Mongo website and anybody interested can and should go there. What languages Mongo supports 10 years from now, will probably be different, and in fact Mongo might be gone by then, and there'll be nobody to update this page. So think of the future and make the page timeless.

OsamaBinLogin (talk) 02:48, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

Categories: