MongoDB Enterprise Advanced Reviews

MongoDB is a document database that we use for internet applications, logs, and all kinds of things that need quick answers, especially in the document area.

I like that MongoDB has a free version. You can also buy the enterprise edition, which is cheaper than Oracle.

It could be more stable. It would be better if it were more user-friendly like Oracle, which is very easy. For example, creating an index is simple in Oracle. In MongoDB, it's quite challenging to do that.

Performance could be better. It's fast and good, but you cannot put every application that you would like to in MongoDB.

I've been using MongoDB for two or three years.

MongoDB isn't stable like Oracle, but it's okay.

MongoDB is a scalable solution. MongoDB has its own problems, but if you have good maintenance, it's okay. Since it's for internet applications, we can have tens of thousands or hundred thousand users.

There is no technical support since it's a community-supported database. If you would like to buy services like that, there are companies which sell that. But it's not like Microsoft or Oracle, where you have an option of buying support. Instead, there are third-party companies that are willing to provide support for a lot of money.

We switched from Oracle to MongoDB because of costs. Oracle also has a MongoDB solution inside it. In Oracle, you can install document databases, which helps, and it also supports JSON and just about everything. It's one-to-one. Whatever you do in MongoDB, you can do it in Oracle. But Oracle isn't free.

The main problem with Oracle today is the price. Many companies around the world are trying to move out of Oracle because of the cost. They are not moving because the database is not good. PostgreSQL is really like Oracle, and MongoDB is like Redis, and all these have free community databases. If you want to buy the enterprise edition, it costs a bit but not as much as Oracle.

The initial setup is straightforward. Even building the cluster and so on isn't a problem. But you have to know what to do because it's a bit different from relational databases. It only takes a couple of hours and not more than that. Once you have the right servers, firewalls, ports open, and so on, you're good to go.

One or two people are enough to maintain this database. But you'll need more people like programmers for the digital part of the application that you have to develop. 

I implemented this solution by myself.

MongoDB has a free version. You can also buy the enterprise edition, which is cheaper than Oracle.

I would recommend MongoDB to potential users depending on their requirements because it's not a relational database. It depends on what applications would they would like to put in it.

On a scale from one to ten, I would give MongoDB an eight.

Our main purpose is to build a historical data lake containing commercial data of service usage, products, retailers and wholesalers, AAA sessions, account recharges and transferences, et cetera. We're looking at the whole company's key internet usage data from a commercial perspective. 

The data lake holds data from 5 years, so now we're triggering ML processes. The impact of the product in the community has been huge, and by that I mean, the community of developers that make apps for the telecommunications market. 

In our country, we were pioneers at using MongoDB. Now, at least 7 developer teams are using it.

It fits well. Data we want to keep represents facts. We've ETL'd from operational systems, so there was no need for relational engines. MongoDB allows us, through replication and sharing, to build a robust platform for keeping data. Even when volume starts to be an issue it is really easy to escalate horizontally and connectors do the rest. 

I thought that choosing javascript as the internal query language might be a mistake, but that was a very good choice. 

The fact is all of our users are happy with the stability and quick response times our solutions have. All of them are based on MongoDB as a persistence engine.

MongoDB is very stable, and, by that I mean, amazingly stable. Using javascript was the key to have a wide range of functionalities based on its syntax and grammar. The aggregation framework is really good, allowing a developer to build very complex queries. The fact a developer builds some functions and can run through the whole cluster, actually and efficiently using all the resources available, is a great advantage. It's given the developers a very robust path to building whatever procedures they need. MongoDB is very, very stable.

The product roadmap shows us that the MongoDB team is very professional. Since we started using the product, it's like having wizards that are one step ahead of our needs. They are looking at the community, the market, and the competition. 

From my point of view, they need a totally free IDE to work at high levels. The best I know is Studio3T, but licensing and an embargo in our country make it difficult to access. MongoDB needs something like Studio3T (Compass is just fine, but it isn't Studio3T) to really get the whole developer community.

I've used the solution for more than six years.

We primarily use the solution for long-term storage. We use it to store all our data. We also use it to support microservices that already have calculated data. We don't use it for any other purpose.

The most valuable feature of the solution is the ability to easily store documentation regarding structures. 

We can easily connect to MongoDB and search without transformation, without joining. If we want to use a simple search it's really fast. 

The initial setup isn't really that complex.

The solution is pretty stable overall.

If we want to perform some joins or some other types of transformation that are more advanced, in that case, we cannot use MongoDB. We need to use another solution.

The solution needs to better support modern aspects of search engines. There is typically a microservice layer and MongoDB doesn't support well within search engines. If you want to create some complex structures, you need something like Elasticsearch, for example.

The pricing is expensive.

MongoDB should better support small and medium companies. There are a lot of clients out there that are interested, however, they need something lighter and less complex and something not so expensive upfront. 

I've been using the solution for the past two or three years.

The stability of the solution is very good. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It's pretty good overall.

I've never used technical support. I can't speak to their level of responsiveness or how knowledgeable they are.

We previously mostly used SQL databases. We used Microsoft SQL mostly and we needed some NoSQL databases. That's why we implemented Elasticsearch and MongoDB. We wanted a NoSQL database that we could search, however, was also capable of long-term storage. 

The initial setup is not so complex when we are talking about on-prem solutions. It's an easy initial setup. We are fine with that. 

I was surprised, however, by the lack of support offered during implementation. You are left to your own devices. There isn't much guidance - especially on so complex a transformation.

We have our own agent teams. Mostly we rely on our engineers, not consultants at other companies. We're able to handle everything rather well in-house.

The pricing is quite high and we don't appreciate the solution raising prices so much.

I'm following up with the licensing, however, I don't have the exact figures right now. I mostly advise some companies about that, and usually do not go into detail. What I'm interested in, for example, is when you implement some solution in some company what are the costs for that company in the near future, for example, in one or two years. This is what we are thinking about. 

It's not easy to implement some solutions in some small companies if at the beginning they need to pay some licensing costs upfront. For example, for Mongo DB. It would be easier if the small companies could operate without licensing for some period of time and then only after they grow to a certain size or need they would have to pay some for that usage.

While I may advise clients on MongoDB, I don't have a direct business relationship with the company.

We always use the latest version that is available.

As we implement the solution for clients, we deal with different deployment models. Typically, for banks, for example, the on-premises deployment is used. However, we've looked into the cloud as well and some clients may consider that deployment instead.

A company considering the solution needs to first think about the project and the infrastructure that they need to implement. Every solution is different. I cannot say that I feel some particular way about MongoDB. It always depends on the organizational need. 

I'd rate the solution at a seven out of ten. I'd rate it higher if it offered more upfront support and a lighter solution for smaller organizations. It would be great if they could build an open-source version, for example.

It stores historical data with ease. For example, if you are a healthcare member, then you will have multiple records of visits to the doctors. To store such data in Oracle Database, you have to create many records. You might also have duplication problems because your records are going in again and again, because of which the data warehouse and the maintenance cost will be huge. MongoDB is comparatively lightweight. It is a JSON extract. Once you define a schema and extract it, you can push all the relationships in any way you want. It is easier to define and get different types of transactions into MongoDB. It is also easier to set it up as compared to other solutions.

MongoDB is a NoSQL database, which means it is a document DB in which you can store documents that you created in BSON. It is pretty fast in response. It is faster than relational databases because it does not define any primary keys, secondary keys, tertiary keys, and all those kinds of things.

A normal Oracle or database tester will take some time to gear up to MongoDB because the way of writing queries is different in MongoDB. There should be some kind of midway where a person who is coming from an Oracle background can write a query and get a response by using something like a select * statement or other such things. There should be some way for MongoDB to interpret these commands rather than making a person learn MongoDB commands and writing them. I struggled while writing these MongoDB commands. I had not seen such queries before. It was pretty difficult to get them. This is one of the areas where it would help from the improvement standpoint.

It is stable.

It is scalable.

I haven't called them ever. I haven't seen any issues, so I would say it's pretty good.

I don't know, but I have heard from people who procure it that it is much cheaper than Oracle.

It is a good tool. You should give it a try. It has a very good and different perspective of looking at how data can be stored in a database and restored from a database because it is not like a straight query or record. The data is just in files. It does whatever a database should do.

I would rate MongoDB a nine out of ten.

We primarily use the solution for web applications.

In our company we decided to invest in the knowledge of an alternative technology to SQL. MongoDB seemed like an obvious choice together with other leading technologies.Furthermore, it is a product that can be intuitive to use unless you come from years of SQL

It has quite good web analytics. It is pretty stable. There is more in-depth management of the data.

It's a NoSQL/Document DB and has some peculiarity related to the data schema but it's also good as a general-purpose DB.

The replication works very well and is in the box. 

In clusters, there is the choice to have horizontal scaling, which improves performance on a huge amount of data.

The aggregation framework is very powerful when elaborating on data. 

It has good high availability.

It's an essential DB. 

It has very good performance for queries.

It is free to use if you choose the community version.

It is stable and reliable.

You can easily scale the solution.

It's quite a good DB that is very strong on a lot of features. 

It is a product that works very well. I don't see a lot of areas that need improvement. 

I've used the solution for five to eight years. I've used it for a while now. 

I'd rate the stability nine or ten out of ten. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze.

I'd rate the scalability nine or ten out of ten. It allows for horizontal scaling, which is quite useful when dealing with big data.

We have about ten people using the solution at this time. One-third of the company ends up using the solution.

We may increase usage. It depends on the business needs. However, in Italy, I have noted MongoDB is expanding.

The technical support is very good but is available only for the enterprise version. 

When I've used other DBs I found them to be inferior.

We have used also Atlas (MongoDB solution for Cloud), and MongoDB has developed a useful framework with lots of new features that are not included in MongoDB's on-premise version. If you choose a cloud DB, it's great if you are looking for a lot of innovative features. 

Many clients use SQL DBs and many are moving over to MongoDB.

The initial setup was pretty straightforward to set up. Compared to other SQL DBs, SQL databases are very complex. MongoDB is ready to go, and you need less operational knowledge. 

I do not invest in MongoDB. However, many customers can save money by leveraging the MongoDB community version. 

The community version is free. The enterprise version is reasonable as MongoDB wants to expand and outpace also SQL DBs. 

I am not using the latest version of the solution. 

Do not think of this solution as a SQL database. Consider your use case and set it up accordingly.

I'd rate the solution ten out of ten. It's the best database on the market.

I have used the product to store and manage data operations.

MongoDB is simpler to learn and implement than traditional SQL solutions like MySQL.

The product's data consistency could be more efficient than traditional SQLs.

I have used MongoDB for a year while working on a project. I was using the latest version.

MongoDB was stable and much faster than traditional SQL.

There were five MongoDB users in our organization working in different teams.

I was working with MySQL before. I decided to use MongoDB rather than other products to learn something new. It is easier to learn and implement than other databases.

The learning process for initial setup is easier compared to traditional SQL. Someone without prior experience working with it can learn the process quickly.

MongoDB is an open-source product. We don't have to pay for the licenses.

I advise others to evaluate a lot of other databases. MongoDB worked fine for my project. However, I would have selected a product besides MongoDB to improve my skills and learn something new.

I rate it a six out of ten.

We use MongoDB for monthly billing of the mobile software we provide to our client, Talent Post. It includes the services they use on their mobile devices.

One of the biggest benefits is the speed and flexibility of the documents, especially when it comes to modifications. It has definitely helped us to function more efficiently.

The best advantage of MongoDB is the flexibility and scalability of the database.

There is a need for improvement in MongoDB's customer support, better support would be great. 

Another feature that I haven't discovered yet but would be useful is a backup and restore process that can handle large database sizes. Right now, I have over three terabytes of data, including logs, which takes a lot of time for snapshot backups.

I started using MongoDB a couple of months ago.

The overall performance is faster than a relational database like SQL. But, the equation function in MongoDB is not as clever as the stored procedure in SQL. It's more complex to write the functionality like a stored procedure in MongoDB.

I would rate the performance of MongoDB a five out of ten.

I would rate the scalability an eight out of ten. I have around 2500 branches of users that use MongoDB simultaneously. We plan on increasing the usage.

I would rate the initial setup a six, where one is for easy and ten is for complex. It is a little complex. It's more complex when we think about deploying MongoDB with the shopping feature. But setting up MongoDB without consideration of shopping would be easy.

The deployment would take a day, but that includes testing. We didn't use any third parties. We deployed the solution ourselves.

I would rate pricing a seven out of ten. It is a bit costly.

I would definitely recommend using the solution.

Overall, I would give it a seven out of ten. The reason is the flexibility it offers, especially for deploying solutions for mobile services. Additionally, it's still considered a new technology in our country, so it's quite trendy.

We use MongoDB for big data analysis. We are also developing monitoring tools, and if our data grows big enough, we'll use MongoDB to silo out the data structure.

In general, I am satisfied with this solution.

MongoDB is fast and efficient.

Currently, I understand that they're revamping and adding a lot of features, and things are moving a little slowly. The performance could be faster.

I have been working with MongoDB for a few years.

I'm not sure which version we're running, but our technical team is keeping up with the latest developments.

MongoDB for now is stable enough.

MongoDB is a scalable solution.

I am satisfied with the technical support.

Previously, I was not using another solution. It was already in place when I joined the company.

I was not involved with the installation. 

We had our technicians complete the installation.

I believe that the licensing fees are paid on a yearly basis.

I would recommend this solution to others who are considering using it.

I would rate MongoDB a seven out of ten.