That report (1) is 4 years old, many things could have changed. But so far any reviewed version was faulty in regards to consistency.
That report (1) is 4 years old, many things could have changed. But so far any reviewed version was faulty in regards to consistency.
We [...] found that transactions executed with serializable isolation on a single PostgreSQL instance were not, in fact, serializable
I have run Postgres and MongoDB at petabyte scale. Both of them are solid databases that occasionally have bugs in their transaction logic. Any distributed database that is receiving significant development will have bugs like this. Yes, even FoundationDB.
I wouldn't not use Postgres because of this problem, just like I wouldn't not use MongoDB because they had bugs in a new feature. In fact, I'm more likely to trust a company that is paying to consistently have their work reviewed in public.
I have listened to Mongo evangelists a few times despite my skepticism and been burned every time. Mongo is way oversold, IMO.
https://www.mongodb.com/blog/post/big-reasons-upgrade-mongod...