Testing the MongoDB Global Write Lock Improvements

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Testing the MongoDB Global Write Lock Improvements

Posted by Unknown on Monday January 2, 2012 @04:07PM from the heckling-haskell-hackers dept.

rick446 writes "I took some time to benchmark the global write lock improvements in MongoDB 2.0. From the article: 'MongoDB, as some of you may know, has a process-wide write lock... Per-database and per-collection locking is on the roadmap ..., but it's not here yet. What was announced in MongoDB version 2.0 was locking-with-yield. I was curious about the performance impact of the write lock and the improvement of lock-with-yield, so I decided to do a little benchmark, MongoDB 1.8 versus MongoDB 2.0.'"

38 comments

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

Incorrect hostname by Anonymous Coward · 2012-01-02 16:09 · Score: 0

Hurray for invalid SSL Certificates for JIRA!
Relevant by tibbetts · 2012-01-02 16:25 · Score: 5, Funny

http://howfuckedismydatabase.com/nosql/ (Some NSFW language.)

--
:wq
Blah blah blah... what? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-01-02 16:45 · Score: 2, Insightful

It's like this articles starts in the middle of a sentence and I can't tell what the hell is going on.
OK, for starters, what the fuck is MongoDB? Just a single sentence or some mention would be helpful. Secondly, why is this front page material? It's just some crappy blog about some minor change to some product nobody uses, woopdeedoo.
1. Re:Blah blah blah... what? by Trepidity · 2012-01-02 16:52 · Score: 5, Funny
  
  I realize it's not widely known in the west, but it's an important database in Mongolia.
  
  --
  10 PRINT CHR$(205.5+RND(1)); : GOTO 10
2. Re:Blah blah blah... what? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-01-02 17:57 · Score: 1, Insightful
  
  Yeah, we're nerds here. We like boring shit, fuck off.
3. Re:Blah blah blah... what? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-01-02 18:39 · Score: 0
  
  shut up retard
4. Re:Blah blah blah... what? by Toonol · 2012-01-03 03:40 · Score: 2
  
  Seems like stuff slashdot needs more of. Less mobile phone stories, less political stories, more substantive and detailed tech stories.
5. Re:Blah blah blah... what? by Overly+Critical+Guy · 2012-01-03 05:58 · Score: 1
  
  Needs more of? Did you read the semantic line interface link or the comments in the discussion? It was just some guy's indecipherable blog post about his text box idea.
  
  --
  "Sufferin' succotash."
6. Re:Blah blah blah... what? by kmoser · 2012-01-03 19:05 · Score: 1
  
  No, it's the DB used by that dude from Blazing Saddles.
Yea me too by Osgeld · 2012-01-02 16:58 · Score: 3, Funny

I hate it when I am benching my mongo and it locks its yeild, quite painful =O
1. Re:Yea me too by Anonymous Coward · 2012-01-03 05:49 · Score: 0
  
  Mongo like beans!
is it still web scale? by larry+bagina · 2012-01-02 17:04 · Score: 1

It's great that they improved the locking. I just hope they didn't compromise web scalability in the process.

--
Do you even lift?
These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.
1. Re:is it still web scale? by citizenr · 2012-01-02 18:25 · Score: 5, Funny
  
  It's great that they improved the locking. I just hope they didn't compromise web scalability in the process.
  obligatory http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b2F-DItXtZs
  
  --
  Who logs in to gdm? Not I, said the duck.
2. Re:is it still web scale? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-01-02 18:26 · Score: 0
  
  mongodb never was web scale
3. Re:is it still web scale? by Billly+Gates · 2012-01-02 19:01 · Score: 2
  
  /dev/null webscales!!!
  
  --
  http://saveie6.com/
4. Re:is it still web scale? by FlyingGuy · 2012-01-02 20:19 · Score: 1
  
  Oh my fucking god, don't ever post shit like this again.... I am off to the farm! I am laughing so fucking hard.....
  
  --
  Hey KID! Yeah you, get the fuck off my lawn!
5. Re:is it still web scale? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-01-02 21:40 · Score: 0
  
  I'm laughing so much I'm "bleeding out of my asshole". Thanks for that... sums up the nosql fanboys better than a million tedious technical discussions.
6. Re:is it still web scale? by blackpaw · 2012-01-03 00:38 · Score: 1
  
  OMG, thank you so much. That was beautiful. Web Scale even.
  Now please excuse, I have to find a plug for my bleeding ass hole.
Pushing locks down by Anonymous Coward · 2012-01-02 17:33 · Score: 3, Insightful

Congratulations. You matter enough to bother reinventing this wheel again. If you continue to matter for a meaningful amount of time you'll end up locking individual documents, or whatever you call them. Oracle called that 'row' locking. 15 years ago.
1. Re:Pushing locks down by FlyingGuy · 2012-01-02 20:12 · Score: 0
  
  Mod + 1x10^1000
  
  --
  Hey KID! Yeah you, get the fuck off my lawn!
2. Re:Pushing locks down by Anonymous Coward · 2012-01-03 05:11 · Score: 0
  
  Oh god ... this makes me feel old ... but Oracle introduced row level locking with the release of Oracle 6 ... in 1988. That's (ahem) 24 years ago. On that note, process wide locking? Really? Was this a high school project that went open source? If not, there's at least one software architect who needs to find another line of work.
3. Re:Pushing locks down by steelfood · 2012-01-03 08:08 · Score: 1
  
  I don't understand why they (and almost every other bit player in databases) are loading everything into main memory. I know disk is slow, but there are more efficient uses for main memory. Like creating a list of locked memory locations. The initial disk hit (which can be offset by intelligent caching and in this case, intelligent lookup) is probably not nearly as detrimental to the database's usability as the limitations from putting the entire database into main memory.
  As for locking, one of their particular challenges is that as a document-oriented db, the granularity of the lock is indeterminate. For a relational db, it's easy, because the way the data is structured and stored follows a certain hierarchy (row=level, page-level, table-level, etc.). However, the meta-structure in Mongo is loose, which means the locking scheme really needs to be either at the root or the leaf level. To do so at an arbitrary branch level would be difficult to implement properly.
  But I still don't see why they couldn't be storing a sychronized list of locked memory locations.
  
  --
  "If a nation expects to be ignorant and free in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be."
Mong by Anonymous Coward · 2012-01-02 17:42 · Score: 0

Yet another crappily named open source project.
1. Re:Mong by Grishnakh · 2012-01-03 06:20 · Score: 1
  
  Not all open-source is the same. Some projects have great (or at least decent) names, some have terrible names. Similarly, some projects are great (technically), while others are shit. Sometimes the two even coincide, as we see with this one: it has a terrible name, and it's a shitty project, only now implementing concepts that real databases had back in the 80s or before.
Emperor Ming uses it. by Anonymous Coward · 2012-01-02 19:16 · Score: 0

That's good enough for me.
Website description vs reality by WaffleMonster · 2012-01-02 19:36 · Score: 0

"MongoDB (from "humongous") is a scalable, high-performance, open source NoSQL database"
LOL I think the word in parens they were looking for is "humours".
What's up with the offensive name? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-01-02 21:00 · Score: 0

I thought "Gimp" was bad enough, but many people are going to find "MongoDB" deeply offensive. What is the point? Is the N-word going to feature in a major OSS project title soon?
1. Re:What's up with the offensive name? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-01-03 01:49 · Score: 0
  
  but many people are going to find "MongoDB" deeply offensive.
  Mongo is slang for huge or big. Its like a Blazing Saddles reference to a character named Mongo; whereby it was stated, if you shoot him, you'll just make him mad. Beyond that, I'm not sure what's offensive about it.
  Its a "big, bad ass database." What's so offensive?
2. Re:What's up with the offensive name? by Man+Eating+Duck · 2012-01-03 02:37 · Score: 2
  
  Mongo is slang for huge or big. Its like a Blazing Saddles reference to a character named Mongo; whereby it was stated, if you shoot him, you'll just make him mad. Beyond that, I'm not sure what's offensive about it.
  Its a "big, bad ass database." What's so offensive?
  In my language, and apparently in English as well, "mongo" is a rude slang term for people with Down syndrome. Although I chuckled when I first read about MongoDB it's obvious that those who chose the name didn't know about this. Disclaimer: Neither I nor any sensible person I know would ever use this slur.
  
  --
  Are you a grammar Nazi? I'm trying to improve my English; please correct my errors! :)
3. Re:What's up with the offensive name? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-01-03 03:20 · Score: 0
  
  Except only a tiny minority of morons actually use "Mongo" as a derogatory term. There is English, slang, and then there is dip shit rat hoods speaking full blown, "Ima loser" ebonics - to which the urban dictionary caters. What you're citing is ebonics, which polite society ignores and rightfully looks down upon. Those who speak ebonics are typically viewed as morons, trash, and generally held to extremely low standards. They speak it to be anti-social and to hold themselves apart from productive and useful society. They are the anti-culture and openly anti-society. Sorry, but MongoDB is not derogatory in any way to anyone who matters.
  As a side note, I'm frequently caught off guard how many foreigners are aware of extremely obscure American culture and vocabulary, believe it to be representative of the norm, and weigh references accordingly. Worse, some of these people actually believe Americans are stupid or uneducated when they don't know about some obscure reference which 99% of the country doesn't know, doesn't accept, or could care less about. Sorry, but the urban dictionary has about as much relevance as my underwear, to this discussion. Maybe if we were talking about hood rats, drug dealers, losers, gangs, etc., you know, other elements of anti-culture culture, but here, we're not talking about any of that. As such, such an obscure reference is completely inappropriate.
  Honestly, I believe the name to be dumb too, but this is the first I've ever heard anyone to believe it to be derogatory. And that reference also seems to ignore the defacto and long standing slang definition of "mongo" which is, "huge or really big." So given the proper and defacto definition, its a database designed to deal with huge or really big data sets. Which unsurprisingly, makes complete sense given its a database whos claim to fame is dealing with huge and really big datasets. Hardly the derogatory reference you imply. If people wish to read something derogatory into that, it really says more about them than it does the name itself.
  Long story short, using your reference is the same thing as believing the word "robot" is bolstering support for slavery; as was the original slang definition (Polish slaves IIRC). As a side note, in my teens, I've even used the expression, "That is one mongo dude." Its meaning was immediately understood given the context. And to be absolutely clear, I was not talking about a disease any way. He was a guy with massive muscles who more than likely was using steroids like candy. And this use, is the defacto slang use. But given the fact the word, "troll" (not implying anything) isn't even used properly anymore by the majority, I can certainly understand why someone might be confused or misled, especially if they are not native English speakers.
4. Re:What's up with the offensive name? by Man+Eating+Duck · 2012-01-03 04:17 · Score: 1
  
  Woah... I didn't say or imply that MongoDB is meant to be derogatory, nor do I find it offensive myself. I intended to explain to my parent post why my grandparent (probably) found it offensive. I also noted that I was sure his implication about the name being deliberately offensive was wrong. I sometimes find that some people (grandparent?) really go out of their way to be offended by whichever coincidence, your post might be better suited as a reply to the topmost post in this thread?
  The reason why I picked up on it is that most Norwegians recognise the word as derogatory and extremely rude, even though polite society ignores and rightfully looks down upon it (to steal your phrase). As in English, it's a word you'll find in some sociolects, or maybe hear from a schoolyard bully. I found the Urban Dictionary reference by googling the word, I probably should have qualified the link with "in some variants of english" or somesuch, but I was really only looking for an explanation of that particular meaning in English.
  Peace?
  
  --
  Are you a grammar Nazi? I'm trying to improve my English; please correct my errors! :)
5. Re:What's up with the offensive name? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-01-03 05:08 · Score: 0
  
  The term comes from "mongoloid", which originally refers to someone who has certain physical features that are common with Southeast Asian populations (hence the mongol part of it.) It can also be used in a negative context to refer to someone who has Down syndrome, which is what you were thinking of. "Mongo" would just be a shortened version of mongoloid, I assume. However, I don't think that I've ever heard someone say it instead of mongoloid. As the anonymous coward above suggested, it's probably just representative of the circles in which I travel.
6. Re:What's up with the offensive name? by Hognoxious · 2012-01-03 07:38 · Score: 1
  
  I grew up in England (when the official scientific term was "mongoloid") and never heard anyone say "mongo", though there was one kid who used to say "mungo". He wasn't one, but he wasn't far off.
  "Mong" was much more common.
  
  Disclaimer: Neither I nor any sensible person I know would ever use this slur.
  Who gives a fuck what you think, you fucking spacker?
  
  --
  Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
7. Re:What's up with the offensive name? by LingNoi · 2012-01-03 20:29 · Score: 1
  
  Mong is slang. Mongo means nothing in English. It's also not that offensive anymore, especially when we're talking about Mongo Database, I didn't even make the connection until you pointed it out.
Ah, bless you MongoDB by Rogerborg · 2012-01-03 07:30 · Score: 2

For when you're too cheap to spring for a BerkeleyDB license, some amateur playing a decade of catchup gives you everything you'd ever need, as long as you don't need support, performance, stability or data integrity.

--
If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
Really interesting comments... by greymeister · 2012-01-04 18:05 · Score: 1

These comments seem up-to-date. That is if they were posted 5 years ago.
it's funny to read all the close minded comments by feuertod · 2012-01-07 10:39 · Score: 1

because i've saved so much time not having to write 500+ lines of DDL for this new web application in MongoDB compared to using a relational database.