Ayende @ Rahien

My name is Oren Eini
Founder of Hibernating Rhinos LTD and RavenDB.
You can reach me by phone or email:


+972 52-548-6969

, @ Q c

Posts: 6,124 | Comments: 45,474

filter by tags archive

RavenDB, Victory

time to read 2 min | 299 words

Jeremy Miller’s post about Would I use RavenDB again has been making the round. It is a good post, and I was asked to comment on it by multiple people.

I wanted to comment very briefly on some of the issues that were brought up:

  • Memory consumption – this is probably mostly related to the long term session usage, which we expect to be much more short lived.
    • The 2nd level cache is mostly there to speed things up when you have relatively small documents. If you have very large documents, or routinely have requests that return many documents, that can be a memory hog. That said, the 2nd level cache is limited to 2,048 items by default, so that shouldn’t really be a big issue. And you can change that (or even turn it off) with ease.
  • Don’t abstract RavenDB too much – yeah, that is pretty much has been our recommendation for a while.
    • I don’t see this as a problem. You have just the same issue if you are using any OR/M against an RDBMS.
  • Bulk Insert – the issue has already been fixed. In fact, IIRC, it was fixed within a day or two of the issue being brought up.
  • Eventual Consistency – Yes, you need to decide how to handle that. As Jeremy said, there are several ways of handling that, from using natural keys with no query latency associated with them to calling WaitForNonStaleResultsAsOfNow();

Truthfully, the thing that really caught my eye wasn’t Jeremy’s post, but one of the comments:


Thanks you, we spend a lot of time on that!


Phillip Haydon

Yup, the documentation is great, the community is great! Can't complain. We get a low volume of users in the JabbR Chatroom for #RavenDB but still fun to answer peoples questions when they stop by!

Pure Krome

Here here!

(and don't forget to hangout in JabbR's #RavenDb room, like @PhillipHaydon said :)

Chris Marisic

I do have to say, as of the current forums it seems that some users are still facing significant difficulty in successfully using bulk insert.

Ayende Rahien

Chris, We found the problem, we think. It is related to the syncronization context used in the code. More specifically, asp.net syncronization contex tseems to be causing a major issue. We identified the issue and have a solution now.

Comment preview

Comments have been closed on this topic.


  1. RavenDB 3.5 whirl wind tour: You want all the data, you can’t handle all the data - about one day from now
  2. The design of RavenDB 4.0: Making Lucene reliable - 3 days from now
  3. RavenDB 3.5 whirl wind tour: I’ll find who is taking my I/O bandwidth and they SHALL pay - 4 days from now
  4. The design of RavenDB 4.0: Physically segregating collections - 5 days from now
  5. RavenDB 3.5 Whirlwind tour: I need to be free to explore my data - 6 days from now

And 14 more posts are pending...

There are posts all the way to May 30, 2016


  1. RavenDB 3.5 whirl wind tour (14):
    29 Apr 2016 - A large cluster goes into a bar and order N^2 drinks
  2. The design of RavenDB 4.0 (13):
    28 Apr 2016 - The implications of the blittable format
  3. Tasks for the new comer (2):
    15 Apr 2016 - Quartz.NET with RavenDB
  4. Code through the looking glass (5):
    18 Mar 2016 - And a linear search to rule them
  5. Find the bug (8):
    29 Feb 2016 - When you can't rely on your own identity
View all series



Main feed Feed Stats
Comments feed   Comments Feed Stats