Modeling Data in MongoDB vs. ArangoDB

This actually looks pretty interesting. I appreciate their FAQ has a great answer to &quot;What is ArangoDB and for what kind of applications is it designed for?&quot; -- more projects need to offer this kind of statement. <a href="https://www.arangodb.com/faq" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.arangodb.com&#x2F;faq</a>

Does ArangoDB use the same storage strategy MongoDB does? From the FAQ:<p>&quot;So how much RAM do you need? This depends on the size and structure of your data: Your application will access one or many collections (think of collections as denormalized tables for the time being). Once you open a collection the indexes for this collection are created in the RAM and the data is loaded into the RAM using memory-mapped files. If your collections are bigger than your RAM, the operation system will be forced to swap data in and out of the swap space.&quot;<p>I&#x27;m not an expert, but a lot of people seem to harp on MongoDB for this very reason. Does ArangoDB use the same strategy? If not, how is it similar&#x2F;different?

Interesting article. An obvious reaction is to say: &quot;In a document store, not all joins will be efficient in a sharding situation!&quot;. This is true, but certain queries involving joins backed by the right secondary indexes will indeed scale well, therefore one should not use this argument as a reason not to implement joins at all.

Is there a rule of thumb, in which situation you would model your connection as foreign key and in which situation you would model it as graph? Or do you always use graphs?

I like that ArangoDB can be extended by micro services. Does this not raise security concerns, because user code is executed on the DB server?

First time i&#x27;ve heard about ArangoDB ,and it looks quite interesting.<p>When did the project start?<p>Could the Foxx thing be an independent application ?

No astroturfing on HN, please.