Can I overestimate (download the shark, so to speak) this application?

I was instructed to start from scratch on the CMS / engine and admin / backend for the website for the company I work for.

What we do will be classified as “completely unique” (although this is not every situation?), And I am looking at how I can move to a better system because of something that just hurts to use.

Our current system provides articles, galleries, user data (updated daily) and channel data in a structured format (for example, weather information), and also provides forums, etc. to our members.

There are a few things that I want to move from our main application, forums for one, but most other things will be rebuilt from scratch. Currently, everything is stored in the MySQL database, and its history is pretty bad (when I took the project loading time, it was about 60 seconds per page, and after removing the stupid database queries and model design it was reduced to an acceptable 0.2 / 0 , 3 second per page).

The site itself is built in Rails, and there is no intention of changing it, however what I am looking at now is how it is ideal for finding other database solutions instead of traditional RDBMS like MySQL.

Considering that most of our content is structured news articles (for example, a news item with a number of attributes, and then what I would call “blocks” of various content - text, embedding videos, images, quotes, etc.), galleries (text and images) I wonder if the document-oriented database such as MongoDB is ideally used.

In terms of performance, I feel that it is comparable to a well-designed MySQL system, and given that the site will be heavily cached (Varnish with ESI for dynamic blocks on a page), database times are not a huge factor.

, , , (, ( ..), ) - admin/owner, (.. , / ..).

, , , , "" , .

: MongoDB , , , ?

, ...

+3
2

, .

CMS , , .

, , : PHP mySQL/Postgres. , Mongo noSQL , , , , , , , mySQL/Postgres . , Mongo/any , .

BarsMonster, HTML . memcached, .

, , , .

+1

? + MySQL 200-400 (< 0,01 ).

, 5 , .

, - , EASIER, , .

0

Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/1769547/


All Articles