> My main problem with most NoSQL solutions is that I have to tweak the problems I have to fit the solution, instead of the other way around. Technologies that can be tweaked simply rock.
Well, I would disagree. While it's great that sql databases let you do lots of joins, I would lose imagination of my query complexity very fast (also, you can't review all sql-queries stopping people from doing joins and "where tablename.status=active" in every joined table). While MongoDB would restrict you from that, but gives you "documents". I'd say it's a lot of power of complexity-clarity (having no joins, but power-enough documents).
p.s.: and yes, I agree with you that developers are ok with postgres on most of cases. more of that, it's better to have transactions and other stuff until it's performance-urgent to disable it).
Well, I would disagree. While it's great that sql databases let you do lots of joins, I would lose imagination of my query complexity very fast (also, you can't review all sql-queries stopping people from doing joins and "where tablename.status=active" in every joined table). While MongoDB would restrict you from that, but gives you "documents". I'd say it's a lot of power of complexity-clarity (having no joins, but power-enough documents).
p.s.: and yes, I agree with you that developers are ok with postgres on most of cases. more of that, it's better to have transactions and other stuff until it's performance-urgent to disable it).