MongoDB Reviews

We used MongoDB on AWS for a specific project.

We put MongoDB on AWS for a specific project. It's easy to use.

If something is wrong on the cluster, then you need to contact the support team. The stability could be better.

I used MongoDB for about a year.

It's okay. It's acceptable. The stability could be better.

If something is wrong on the cluster, you need to contact the support team. At first, when we were trying to build a cluster.

Neutral

We rated MongoDB a seven out of ten.

We use MongoDB mainly for data visualization and filtering purposes.

MongoDB's most valuable feature is data visualization.

They could provide more documentation and examples for adding pipeline stages. There could be a feature where commands made in MongoDB could be easily copied and shared in their original format. This functionality would enable seamless transition and compatibility between platforms like Linux and mobile devices, reducing the need for complex filters or Citrix-based solutions.

We have been using MongoDB for five months.

I rate the platform's stability a nine out of ten.

My department has around 50 MongoDB users.

It is a cloud-based version and is simple to deploy.

We evaluated OracleDB and MongoDB. We decided to work with MongoDB as its interface is easier to understand and more universal. It offers ease of integration and simpler configurations compared to OracleDB. It also provides all the essential functionality.

I rate MongoDB a nine out of ten.

We do payroll for government workers. One service we provide is called e-Payslip. You go into the portal, create an account, and download your payslip for the month. If you have to do something that requires you to submit a payslip, you can go to the portal and get your payslip electronically. 

We also have what we call the ESPV. This allows unit managers to validate workers before they are paid for the month. It's an attempt to remove ghost names from the government payroll, so there's a cycle. At some point, somebody who is actually working must be validated in the system, and then the unit head confirms. This is checked by HR before salaries are paid, so you have to be a validated worker before your salary is paid. 

I think that MongoDB isn't too structured, and that's good for our technical team because they are able to search through the database better than if they are using SQL Server.

I feel that most people don't know a lot about MongoDB, so maybe they could add some more documentation and tutorials. In general, I think they should do more to publicize the solution because when I'm in a meeting and I start talking about migrating to MongoDB, people don't know what I'm talking about.

I've worked with MongoDB for maybe two years. In fact, we recently upgraded and moved everything from SQL Server to Postgres and MongoDB. We went live just about a month ago. This was supposed to be the solution to all our problems, and we are in the process of testing to confirm that we are fine. 

MongoDB is stable. 

We mostly used Microsoft databases in the past. We started with Access and Microsoft SQL Server. I've also used Innovation together with SQL Server.

I'll give MongoDB a 10 out of 10. We are getting positive feedback, so far.

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.

I think that MongoDB's search engine should be improved.

My impression is that this is a stable product.

My impression is that this is a scalable product.

When it comes to technical support, I am the same as our reseller. I use community help and google.

My impression is that the initial setup is straightforward.

MongoDB is a fast and safe solution.

I would rate this solution as a whole a seven, on a scale from one to 10, with one being the worst and 10 being the best.

MongoDB's best features are scalability, document management, and data security.

MongoDB would be improved with more integration, particularly for cloud environments like Google BigQuery.

I've been using MongoDB for eight years.

MongoDB's stability is very good.

MongoDB's scalability is one of its best features.

The initial setup was pretty simple.

I would rate MongoDB eight out of ten.

Migrating to MongoDB upgrades the IT environment and puts users in the NoSQL environment, which is faster.

There are some problems with bugs appearing in sharding when the data is too high. MongoDB also needs to update and be more flexible to match up to more mature products like Oracle or SQL.

I've been using MongoDB for three years.

MongoDB is stable and reliable.

MongoDB is scalable.

MongoDB's technical support is quite good.

Previously, I used AWS DocumentDB and DynamoDB.

The initial setup was straightforward, and deployment took around two hours.

We did the implementation ourselves.

MongoDB is a bit expensive compared to its competitors.

I would advise anyone thinking of implementing MongoDB to test the sharding and duplication concepts in your environment with a huge number of data to see how it will work with multiple scenarios or test cases. I would give MongoDB a rating of ten out of ten.

When the company started, MongoDB was our primary database.

It offers great flexibility where developers can define any key and assign a value to it. This means that there is very little that one has to plan in terms of designing the schema upfront, so developers enjoy a lot of flexibility. Now that we have more use cases for which NoSQL is not suitable, we are trying to move those workloads out of MongoDB.

MongoDB is extremely developer-friendly because when you are starting, there is very little time needed upfront in terms of planning. Whenever a developer wants to build a certain feature, they simply define a key and a value and that's it.

It is very easy to create an index on a field that you want to have searchable.

All of the documents are stored in JSON format, which gives developers a lot of flexibility.

MongoDB should not be used for reporting, analytics, or number-crunching tasks.

The pricing should be improved because the whole design is around replication of data, so in terms of storage costs, in the long run, it will be expensive. The amount of storage grows very quickly when compared to other databases that store data in normalized form. If there were a way that some data could be partitioned or moved into cold storage then it would be very good.

We have been using MongoDB for about four and a half years.

There are bugs in the system but they are not very significant. We have found a workaround for each of those bugs and we have been running the full-scale production cluster for more than four and a half years. As we haven't had any issues, I would say that it is pretty stable.

This solution is used constantly by both us and our customers, every second of every day.

We are not looking at increasing our usage. Rather, we will be moving some of our workloads off of MongoDB. Ultimately, usage will be at a standstill or perhaps even reduced.

This is a scalable solution. We have close to 100 developers who use it. In addition, our entire business makes use of MongoDB. Everything the customer does makes use of this solution, so I would say that we have at least 100,000 users.

Because we are using the Community Edition, we don't have any support whatsoever.

We did interact with them for MongoDB Atlas, and we are still in contact with them to see if we can take something into production a couple of quarters from now.

We did not use another NoSQL database solution prior to MongoDB.

When we installed MongoDB the initial setup was complex. However, now with Atlas, it is very easy. It took us less than a week to deploy and now, with Atlas, there are a lot of things that you don't need to know that was required four years ago.

I did the original cluster deployment on my own.

We are using the Community Edition of MongoDB. However, we would be happy if the pricing for the full version were more competitive.

We use a lot of different database products and the choice depends on the use case.

With respect to NoSQL, we did not evaluate other vendors because when we implemented this solution four and a half years ago, it was the only scalable NoSQL database. This made it a rather obvious choice for us at the time.

The features that I have looked for are in this solution and we are using an older version. The current cloud-offering, MongoDB Atlas, has even more features. It would be a natural fit for us, but it will not be easy to move because we have a lot of dependencies. We have to update drivers, isolate collections, and take care of other issues before we can switch.

My advice for anybody who is implementing this solution, or any other database, is to take care to plan your indexes because it is extremely important. Spending some time designing the document structure in the initial phase will certainly help you in the long run.

I would also suggest that in terms of sharding, try to think about it as early as possible so that when you are ready to scale, it will certainly help to reduce the workload.

Do not rely on MongoDB for any of the analytics use cases. Aggregation works well but do not use it for your reporting or analytics or number crunching-related tasks.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.