Which (as a document store) has plenty of use cases... and even when you read the article it's mostly about how they didn't understand what they were doing going into things... It's not a compelling argument.
"But this stuff wasn’t obvious at all. The MongoDB docs tell you what it’s good at, without emphasizing what it’s not good at. That’s natural. All projects do that. But as a result, it took us about six months, a lot of user complaints, and a lot of investigation to figure out that we were using MongoDB the wrong way."
The film/actor/career example they wanted to do could have been solved pretty easily with a document that had an _id for an actors collection and a name... that's just the document paradigm... I'm a huge fan of both postgres and mongodb and I know that's not a popular opinion around HN. I just get tired of seeing clickbait headlines being cited as the criticism within is correct.
