Separating Data That is Accessed Together
Rate this article
We're breezing through the MongoDB schema design anti-patterns. So far in this series, we've discussed four of the six anti-patterns:
and splitting it into different pieces to optimize for space and reduce data duplication can feel like second nature to those with a relational database background. However, separating data that is frequently accessed together is actually an anti-pattern in MongoDB. In this post, we'll find out why and discuss what you should do instead.
If you prefer to learn by video (or you just like hearing me repeat, "Data that is accessed together should be stored together"), watch the video above.
Much like you would use a
jointo combine information from different tables in a relational database, MongoDB has a operation that allows you to join information from more than one .
$lookupis great for infrequent, rarely used operations or analytical queries that can run overnight without a time limit. However,
$lookupis not so great when you're frequently using it in your applications. Why?
$lookupoperations are slow and resource-intensive compared to operations that don't need to combine data from more than one collection.
The rule of thumb when modeling your data in MongoDB is:
Data that is accessed together should be stored together.
Instead of separating data that is frequently used together between multiple collections, leverage embedding and arrays to keep the data together in a single collection.
If combining data from separate collections into a single collection will result in massive, unbounded arrays or bloated documents, you may want to keep the collections separate and duplicate some of the data that is used frequently together in both collections. You could use the to duplicate a subset of the documents from one collection in another. You could also use the to duplicate a portion of the data in each document from one collection in another. In both patterns, you have the option of creating between the documents in both collections. Keep in mind that whenever you need to combine information from both collections, you'll likely need to use
$lookup. Also, whenever you duplicate data, you are responsible for ensuring the duplicated data stays in sync.
As we have said throughout this series, each use case is different. As you model your schema, carefully consider how you will be querying the data and what the data you will be storing will realistically look like.
What would an Anti-Pattern post be without an example from Parks and Recreation? I don't even want to think about it. So let's return to Leslie.
Leslie decides to store information related to the Model United Nations in a MongoDB database. She wants to store the following information in her database:
- Basic stats about each country
- A list of resources that each country has available to trade
- A list of delegates for each country
- Policy statements for each country
- Information about each Model United Nations event she runs
With this information, she wants to be able to quickly generate the following reports:
- A country report that contains basic stats, resources currently available to trade, a list of delegates, the names and dates of the last five policy documents, and a list of all of the Model United Nations events in which this country has participated
- An event report that contains information about the event and the names of the countries who participated
The Model United Nations event begins, and Andy is excited to participate. He decides he doesn't want any of his country's "boring" resources, so he begins trading with other countries in order to acquire all of the world's lions.
Leslie decides to create collections for each of the categories of information she needs to store in her database. After Andy is done trading, Leslie has documents like the following.
When Leslie wants to generate a report about Finland, she has to use
$lookupto combine information from all five collections. She wants to optimize her database performance, so she decides to leverage embedding to combine information from her five collections into a single collection.
Leslie begins working on improving her schema incrementally. As she looks at her schema, she realizes that she has a one-to-one relationship between documents in her
Countriescollection and her
Resourcescollection. She decides to embed the information from the
Resourcescollection as sub-documents in the documents in her
Now the document for Finland looks like the following.
As you can see above, she has kept the information about resources together as a sub-document in her document for Finland. This is an easy way to keep data organized.
She has no need for her
Resourcescollection anymore, so she deletes it.
At this point, she can retrieve information about a country and its resources without having to use
Leslie continues analyzing her schema. She realizes she has a one-to-many relationship between countries and delegates, so she decides to create an array named
delegatesarray will store objects with delegate information. Now her document for Finland looks like the following:
Leslie feels confident about storing the delegate information in her country documents since each country will have only a handful of delegates (meaning her array won't grow infinitely), and she won't be frequently accessing information about the delegates separately from their associated countries.
Leslie no longer needs her
Delegatescollection, so she deletes it.
Leslie continues optimizing her schema and begins looking at her
Policiescollection. She has a one-to-many relationship between countries and policies. She needs to include the titles and dates of each country's five most recent policy documents in her report. She considers embedding the policy documents in her country documents, but the documents could quickly become quite large based on the length of the policies. She doesn't want to fall into the trap of the , but she also wants to avoid using
$lookupevery time she runs a report.
Leslie decides to leverage the . She stores the titles and dates of the five most recent policy documents in her country document. She also creates a reference to the policy document, so she can easily gather all of the information for each policy when needed. She leaves her
Policiescollection as-is. She knows she'll have to maintain some duplicate information between the documents in the
Countriescollection and the
Policiescollection, but she decides duplicating a little bit of information is a good tradeoff to ensure fast queries.
Her document for Finland now looks like the following:
Leslie continues examining her query for her report on each country. The last
$lookupshe has combines information from the
Countriescollection and the
Eventscollection. She has a many-to-many relationship between countries and events. She needs to be able to quickly generate reports on each event as a whole, so she wants to keep the
Eventscollection separate. She decides to use the to solve her dilemma. She includes the information she needs about each event in her country documents and maintains a reference to the complete event document, so she can get more information when she needs to. She will duplicate the event date and event topic in both the
Eventscollections, but she is comfortable with this as that data is very unlikely to change.
After all of her updates, her document for Finland now looks like the following:
Data that is accessed together should be stored together. If you'll be frequently reading or updating information together, consider storing the information together using nested documents or arrays. Carefully consider your use case and weigh the benefits and drawbacks of data duplication as you bring data together.
Be on the lookout for a post on the final MongoDB schema design anti-pattern!
Check out the following resources for more information:
This is part of a series
MongoDB Schema Design Anti-Patterns
More in this series
Store Sensitive Data With Python & MongoDB Client-Side Field Level Encryption
Sep 23, 2022 | 11 min read