<div dir="ltr">><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">What about abstraction layer idea based on Hibernate OGM?</span><div><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">I agree with being able to support different type of databases, relational as well as non-relational. The interface is pretty simple but everything is currently in the core modules which is bad. We have now extracted them into separate modules[1] and I'm currently working on improving the interface and adding the Redis datastore example into a separate module as well. </span></div>
<div><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><br></span></div><div><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">I've not looked into Hibernate OGM but if it is limited to those then perhaps this is something for a future version.</span></div>
<div><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><br></span></div><div><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">[1] </span><font face="arial, sans-serif"><a href="https://issues.jboss.org/browse/AGPUSH-363">https://issues.jboss.org/browse/AGPUSH-363</a></font></div>
</div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On 26 September 2013 11:50, Karel Piwko <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:kpiwko@redhat.com" target="_blank">kpiwko@redhat.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
No reason to push for Mongo then, my experience with NoSQL databases (not<br>
counting XML databases) is pretty limited and I'm glad you gave me some insight.<br>
<br>
What about abstraction layer idea based on Hibernate OGM? Does it make any<br>
sense to you? Currently is does support only Infinispan, EHCache and MongoDB<br>
[1], so I guess it's out of question as well.<br>
<br>
Karel<br>
<br>
<br>
[1]<br>
<a href="http://docs.jboss.org/hibernate/ogm/4.0/reference/en-US/html/ogm-datastore-providers.html" target="_blank">http://docs.jboss.org/hibernate/ogm/4.0/reference/en-US/html/ogm-datastore-providers.html</a><br>
<div class="im HOEnZb"><br>
On Wed, 25 Sep 2013 17:59:10 -0300<br>
Douglas Campos <<a href="mailto:qmx@qmx.me">qmx@qmx.me</a>> wrote:<br>
<br>
> On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 09:53:19AM -0700, JR Conlin wrote:<br>
> > The concern with using Mongo is that it's very lossy and fairly<br>
> > unreliable as a data store for a number of reasons. (It's fine for<br>
> > simple, low demand systems, but has complications once you really start<br>
> > to hammer on it.)<br>
> ><br>
> > <a href="http://blog.schmichael.com/2011/11/05/failing-with-mongodb/" target="_blank">http://blog.schmichael.com/2011/11/05/failing-with-mongodb/</a><br>
> > <a href="http://blog.engineering.kiip.me/post/20988881092/a-year-with-mongodb" target="_blank">http://blog.engineering.kiip.me/post/20988881092/a-year-with-mongodb</a><br>
> > etc.<br>
> ><br>
> > I'd suggest sticking with other DBs unless you're ok with loss or don't<br>
> > plan on heavily exercising it.<br>
><br>
> Seconded, have had severe data loss with mongo under high load at my<br>
> previous job<br>
><br>
<br>
</div><div class="HOEnZb"><div class="h5">_______________________________________________<br>
aerogear-dev mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:aerogear-dev@lists.jboss.org">aerogear-dev@lists.jboss.org</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev" target="_blank">https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev</a><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br></div>