DEV Community

loading...

Discussion on: PostgreSQL vs MongoDB

rhymes profile image
rhymes

Sorry, it definitely wasn't my intention to attribute you words and meaning, it's what I understood by reading your comment. That said:

When the team is in a research/decision phase, there's nothing at all wrong with someone proposing a solution based upon their own experience. It doesn't mean their proposal will be adopted - but neither does it mean that there's anything wrong with making the proposal.

That's not what I meant as well. I'm trying to say that most people are not reasonably knowledgeable enough and also don't have enough time to test all potential options for every single decisions to make a perfectly informed choice. That's why we rely on the collective experience. I can't test all databases every time I need to choose one, but I can have a generic idea of which type I might need based on personal or collective experience.

That was my point.

But if the only tool that you continually, blindly, stubbornly force into every project is a hammer, then you're no carpenter. You're a hammer salesman.

Sure! But choosing a DB is not the same thing, right? I often think engineering or carpentry analogies fall short when compared to software (the prefix "soft" in the word is very apt).

Let's see it like this: building a house is a collective effort which requires all sort of tools in all cases, one could prefer a type of hammer or another, but they still require one. They also require construction materials, welding, scaffolding and other stuff. A carpenter going around the construction site saying "please weld with my hammer" wouldn't make sense anyway and they probably wouldn't have a job :D

Choosing a database only implies knowing which data model better fits the application one want to build and a bit of forward looking. Teams can still choose wrongly and it can cost the company a lot, but changing a database is not the same as redoing a house because nobody used bricks in the first place.

That's why I think civil engineering analogies often fall shorts when directly compared to software development. Same with the evergreen tendency of comparing building a bridge to software architecture -_-

Indeed. Why not?? If you're throwing these labels out there as fringe examples that simply don't warrant consideration, then you are highlighting the problem that I was originally alluding to.

Because of time constraint. The same argument would apply to programming languages, libraries and everything else. You'd be in forever constant comparison cycle and never get anything done.

No. Most of them cannot (or, more accurately, will not). Your statement sounds very reasonable - if you've never actually had to deal with developers before. There are far too many devs who learned a given tech/tool/approach/whatever - probably many years ago - and now they refuse to properly assess any alternatives.

Sure and I agree with you here but that's a character trait, they can still be right sometimes? At least once ;-) (after all the hammer is still the right tool in some cases).

No. This shouldn't be a case of "logic vs. experience". We should never throw out logic due to past experiences. Nor should we throw out experience due to some academic maxim of logic.

No, as I implied, maybe incorrectly, you need both at the same time. That's why the camp "always use a DBMS forever and ever" is wrong but also "spend 3 months evaluating all possible options for every tool" is also not always practical due to time or cost contraints

Forem Open with the Forem app