MongoDB Enterprise Advanced Reviews

We do not use MongoDB extensively. Initially, we wanted to store login information, dumping the entire message into the database. It stores transaction details about the users, but only for login purposes. Essentially, we store information about access and usage.

In the future, we will build some reports for this data.

MongoDB is the best choice for us when we want to store NoSQL-type data.

The clustering is very good. It allows us to have high availability.

The performance is good. 

The user interface is not as friendly as Oracle, which is something that can be improved.

We have been working with MongoDB for a couple of years.

So far, MongoDB has been quite stable.

MongoDB is definitely scalable. By setting up a cluster, we are able to scale well.

At this point, we are only using it for login purposes and only with two or three applications.

We have not used technical support very much because we don't have any issues with it. It has been quite stable and also, we are only using it for a limited purpose at this point. 

We also use Oracle and we have found that if you want to have a DR site, you need to replicate the data from one site to the other. With MongoDB, we set up a cluster on the wide-area network, and we don't have to do any data replication. Instead, it will help you with these things.

With Oracle, the user interface makes it easy to explore the database. With MongoDB, the interface is quite primitive and it is more difficult to look at the data. It is not as user-friendly.

There are a lot of vendor and third-party tools that work on top of Oracle, but this is not so much the case with MongoDB.

I was not personally involved in the installation.

We have an in-house team for deployment and maintenance.

We did not evaluate other similar solutions before implementing MongoDB.

Prior to MongoDB, we focused on relational databases.

This is a good product and I recommend it for anybody who wants to store NoSQL data. It provides a lot of features and the clustering, in particular, is a good one.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

We use this solution to deal with large amounts of data, including pictures, voice data, and video data. These types of data are not suitable for SQL databases — MongoDB was designed to deal with such data. Video, pictures, voice, and other files.

Currently, we just have one customer using this solution. 

It's a complex solution, but MongoDB can deal with many kinds of files — I can send video, pictures, voice data, and files. MongoDB can deal with these types of big data. It can handle a lot of files quickly. Older products like MySQL, cannot deal with files quickly.

Our engineer is having a bit of trouble because it's a new concept database. Currently, we're just getting used to the product. 

I have been using MongoDB for slightly less than one year.

Our program developer finds it to be a little unstable, development-wise. Still, it's hard to say because we're new to this solution. It could just be that we don't understand how to properly use it yet.

We don't even know how to get ahold of MongoDB support. We don't know how to contact them. We prefer local support. 

The initial setup is not very easy. We need to perform several configurations. 

Deployment requires one or two engineers. We're integrators.

We have one customer using this solution. They asked to use MongoDB because they deal with large amounts of data. Oracle and MySQL cannot handle such large amounts of data so they need to migrate to a NoSQL database. For this reason, they asked us to evaluate MongoDB.

As we have not finished our evaluation yet, I can only give it a rating of seven out of ten. I can't recommend it yet for the same reason. 

We use it in our virtual environment.

Our software produces a lot of predefined JSON Structures. We save those JSONs in an encrypted form inside MongoDB.

It's simple storage of JSON. We do not perform any database functions.

In our case, it is most important to have redundancy. It supports a replica set and it allows us to use mutual TLS for authentications with the certificates.

The documentation is useful.

We work with the community edition and it would be really nice to have for the database side encryption, but it's not available in the community. It is only available in the enterprise edition.

We use mutual TLS, which means we use the certificate for authentication and connection encryption.

When I want to connect to a node, I need to supply the certificate that MongoDB trusts, even though I use an admin password. This is not useful, and it complicates things.

It would be much more useful if I have an admin user and a password.

I would like it to be more straightforward when connecting to a node.

We have been using MongoDB for the last 12 months.

We are using version 4.4.0.

It's pretty stable. We don't have any complaints.

It's a scalable solution. We haven't had any issues. 

We are in development mode, and not really used by users. We have five people for development.

We can't know for sure if we will continue to use this solution. We are still in the development phase so we have to see when we finish.

I have not contacted technical support. I used the official documentation, which was enough for me.

The initial setup was straightforward. We used Docker, so it was pretty easy.

It didn't take long to deploy.

It's free. It's a community edition, so we do not pay anything.

There are no additional costs.

We didn't really evaluate other solutions. We did not have strict requirements in choosing a database. We just needed to keep JSON files informed when we produce them and MongoDB seems to be fine for us.

I would rate MongoDB a nine out of ten.

We just recently downloading the product and we were trying to do the migration and it worked well. We use it as an individual level only, small projects, and small migrations. We have completed a full project yet.

One of the most valuable features is the ability to Text Search can be used anywhere and anytime.

I have found the solution difficult to operate as an administrator. They could improve the experience by adding some more features to the UI. There needs to be better integration, we have been having some issues with some projects.

I have been using the solution for the past year.

The solution has been scalable so far for our level of raw data and we expect it will be good even if we complete the whole project.

We have used SQL Server and Elasticsearch in the past. SQL Server was easier to manage as an administrator than this solution.

The installation of the solution was not an issue for the client or the server.

The solution is straightforward to download and install. However, configuring is what takes time. For a small migration, there were approximately seven people involved. We all spent some time learning the new product.

If you want support with the solution you will need to purchase a license and not use the open-source version. The license is a little expensive.

Going by my level of experience in these solutions I would recommend it to others.

I rate MongoDB an eight out of ten.

We recently had customers asking about MongoDB, so we have started to deploy new environments for that. We have implemented it may be four times. We are implementing it for our customers in our own infrastructure. We have done on-premises as well as cloud deployments. 

Our database team works on the use cases. I work only on the implementation part. I am responsible for getting the clusters up and running. I'm just managing the server and guaranteeing that the clusters are up and running and backing up. I also handle the monitoring.

It is very easy to create a MongoDB cluster. You can deploy three nodes in one hour.

You can do small configurations to enable routing. It is easy to implement.

It should have GUI for managing clusters. MongoDB needs a more powerful GUI to manage clusters and make switchovers. Currently, there is no good, free tool to check the replication to find out if there is a gap. 

It is very stable.

It is very scalable. You can add nodes every day to the replica.

I have no experience with technical support.

It is easy to implement. One person can manage ten managed MongoDB clusters.

At the moment, all customers are using the community version.

I would highly recommend this solution. I would rate MongoDB a nine out of ten.

We use both SQL and MongoDB and they have similar characteristics. We use both tools for our work. We have less than 50 users on MongoDB in our organization.

Its flexibility, and cost. It is reasonably priced.

MongoDB should be more stable, and support should be more efficient.

We have been using the latest version for the last two years.

We have some challenges but we are working on them. It should be a bit more stable.

It is scalable.

We have some challenges with support, but we can usually get the right people. Customer support could be more knowledgeable, customer-friendly, and faster.

MongoDB is not a difficult product to setup.

We do not need a big team for deployment, or a high level of technical expertise. We have a couple of managers and admins.

We did not consider another product, as MongoDB was part of the whole implementation.

At this point, I rate MongoDB a 6 out of 10. We are going to keep using MongoDB.

We use this solution to store log files. We have a Cloud telephone product and we use MongoDB to store our calling records. A number of users have access to it. 

We plan to continue using this solution.

MongoDB is relatively fast compared to relational databases. The files are stored in XML format, which is a stable format. 

MongoDB is also great for managing logs.

Databases provide the data and any software can access those databases as per the access protocol — the database itself provides the data.

You can have the same database in multiple geographic locations. You can update it from different locations and the other locations also get updated. In that way, it is a good product. Very good.

You can update the server from another platform (Mongoose) which sits on top of MongoDB and makes it a relational database. The beautiful thing about MongoDB is that it's not a relational database — multiple statements are there so it's easy to access. It serves the purpose for which we are using it.

I suppose it could be a little more secure.

I have been using this solution for a couple of years.

This solution is both scalable and stable.

We are actually using the community version so we manage it ourselves. We have engaged a consultant so if we have any problems, we just sort it out with him.

We were also using MariaDB, but MongoDB is good for certain situations in which MariaDB is not suited for. For example, managing the database of log files is easier with MongoDB.

You don't need many people to install MongoDB or to fine-tune it. You need a database expert if you have any problems, but it is fairly simple.

I didn't install it. I believe my team had to spend some time learning how to handle MongoDB, so they gained some expertise and they started using it. Overall, installation doesn't take longer than one hour.

I would absolutely recommend this solution to others. Overall, on a scale from one to ten, I would give this solution a rating of eight.

We use it for document storage and testing of a proof of concept.

I like the document storage feature. It's pretty simple. I also like the distribution of databases. It's easier to put information about my users.

It would help if MongoDB offered a light solution for small projects. Its become a very big database, and we need a smaller solution for our end-users.

I have been using MongoDB for two years.

MongoDB is stable. It's a good server. If you install perfect hardware tools and follow best practices, it'll be a good solution.

MongoDB is scalable. It's very good.

The initial setup is straightforward. It isn't hard to set up, make a cluster, and distribute.

I would recommend it to potential users who have a big project because MongoDB is good for big projects.

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