We compared ScyllaDB and MongoDB across several key parameters based on reviews from actual users of both databases. While both are mature solutions, ScyllaDB's technical architecture gives it performance and scalability advantages for demanding workloads. But MongoDB provides a wider range of deployment options more aligned with early-stage growth. Below is a summary of our findings:
Based on user experiences, ScyllaDB's multiprimary design provides very high performance at scale, with solid throughput and low latency suited for data-intensive workloads. MongoDB offers more implementation flexibility but lags in scalability. For large-scale distributed applications, ScyllaDB has advantages in speed, simplicity and efficiency.
"MongoDB is relatively fast compared to relational databases."
"Easier to maintain the data with its document-based storage."
"The Dynamic Application is a valuable feature."
"The integration capabilities of MongoDB are fine for the solutions that we use in our company."
"Migrating to MongoDB upgrades the IT environment and puts users in the NoSQL environment, which is faster."
"MongoDB is scalable and stable. The initial setup is very easy, and deployment and maintenance can be done by one person."
"MongoDB's approach to handling data in documents rather than traditional tables has been particularly beneficial."
"One of the most valuable features is the ability to Text Search can be used anywhere and anytime."
"The performance aspects of Scylla are good, as always... A good point about Scylla is that it can be used extensively."
"It is lightweight, and it requires less infrastructure."
"The solution can be a bit tough to set up if you don't have knowledge about how the database works."
"It could be much more flexible like SequoiaDB. I would like to see more flexibility in the next release, especially when working with Microsoft Windows. A lot of people struggle with MongoDB because of their Windows versions. But Linux is faultless and mostly runs nicely."
"MongoDB should be more stable, and support should be more efficient."
"MongoDB can improve large-size video or media frame operations. There are a lot of customers who want to upload media frames and video games but there is some difficulty. In MongoDB, we are looking out for solutions that are for large-size media files that can be saved and navigated efficiently."
"I don't see a lot of areas that need improvement."
"The dashboard is an area of concern in the solution where improvements are required."
"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."
"The performance could be faster."
"Data export, along with how we can purchase the data periodically, needs to be improved so that the storage is within control. Then, we could optimize it even better."
"The documentation of Scylla is an area with shortcomings and needs to be improved."
MongoDB is ranked 1st in NoSQL Databases with 70 reviews while ScyllaDB is ranked 6th in NoSQL Databases with 2 reviews. MongoDB is rated 8.2, while ScyllaDB is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of MongoDB writes "Lightweight with good flexibility and very fast performance for searching data". On the other hand, the top reviewer of ScyllaDB writes "A solution that offers good performance and flexibility to its users". MongoDB is most compared with InfluxDB, Couchbase, Cassandra, Oracle NoSQL and Oracle Berkeley DB, whereas ScyllaDB is most compared with Cassandra, Couchbase, Apache HBase, Aerospike Database 7 and InfluxDB. See our MongoDB vs. ScyllaDB report.
See our list of best NoSQL Databases vendors.
We monitor all NoSQL Databases reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.