MongoDB Reviews

Our primary use case of this solution is to directly monitor public services.

I like that this solution helps us to manage our allowed time on the release date or entry, but if you have a conventional application where you have to make a lot of queries with the joints, you have to mix the information of several tables. You cannot go to a non-relational database, you have to go to an Oracle or MariaDB or whatever. But if you have other queries like smaller tables with a lot of resistance, MongoDB will be okay.

MongoDB is very valuable for us due to the large amount of entries that we can install in the database. The solution makes it very easy for us to develop with these databases. It is also easy for development and to list all our entries in a single table. 

We find it difficult to incorporate MongoDB in some projects. It's also very complicated to join different tables. For example, MongoDB works very well with the note GS Java Script. But when you try to develop in Java, it is not so easy. So the integration is not very simple. 

My colleagues, however, reported that it's easy to manage the database. I also know that it is very easy to make an application in Java scripts. 

We haven't had any issues with stability since we started using this solution two years ago.

We're not currently using the alert implementation of MongoDB, but it's enough for us and we can escalate to put in more machines if we like. We are not using that many implementations.

We don't use the technical support because we have our own technical team that can help us.

We use MariaDB as the main product of the company, but we find it difficult to fine-tune the database and to increase our services. We also have problems with queries. So we implemented MongoDB with MariaDB because MariaDB doesn't have the same capabilities and now we can do some fine-tuning of the database. 

The initial setup was very easy and we did everything ourselves.

My advice to others would be not to use MongoDB for complex business applications or difficult queries. There are some integration issues that need to improve, so I will rate this solution an eight out of ten. Still, it is a very good product that is user-friendly and it works fast. 

We use MongoDB in different products. The first is a Business Process Management System (BPMS) that we have developed for ourselves. MongoDB stores all of the data for business flow management.

The second product is in the capital market. We have implemented it to use all of the stock-related data.

We have also developed an online shipping product, using MongoDB for storing product features.

The most valuable feature is that you can store unstructured data, which is helpful when you don't know what the best structure should be and you cannot use a relational database because of that. For example, in our online shopping product, different products have different features and there is no structure for all of the data.

The usability is good.

Compared to a relational database, the performance is good.

The performance can be improved. While it is good compared to relational-type databases, it could still be improved.

Stability-wise, there is some room for improvement.

I have been working with MongoDB for between four and five years.

If you take care of the application and check everything then it will be stable. However, if you do not maintain it properly and do not have support then stability will be a problem.

We have not tried to scale our implementation of MongoDB.

We do not have direct support for this product. Instead, we have used the community-based resources that are available on the internet. For example, we have searched for questions and taken advice from the community in order to resolve our problems.

We may have used InfluxDB for some reason but I don't recall any of the details.

The initial setup is simple and not a problem to complete. I don't recall the exact length of time that it took to deploy, but I think that it was completed within one or two days.

We deployed MongoDB ourselves.

We have two administrators who maintain and work with it on a daily basis.

We use the open-source version, which is available to use free of charge.

My advice for anybody who is considering MongoDB is that when we want to have flexibility in storing our data, I recommend using it. We can store anything, in any format, in any size, and accessing the data is the same speed. In the case where you have structured data or it is in a unique format, this is not the product that you use.

In summary, this is a good product and it has been very useful for our purpose.

I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.

We used MongoDB to implement a healthcare application into the Amazon Cloud. We deployed that architecture within the South African public health care sector.

One feature that we found most valuable is that it is completely open source - this was majorly important. Because we worked for a nongovernmental organization we had to work with only open source tools. So that was a big selling point for MongoDB. We also needed a document-based DB to build this FHIR application on top of, MongoDB offers. 

Another major selling point was that they're massively scalable. The fact that unlike relational databases, MongoDB allows a lot more scalability and it was more suited for the type of data that we were storing, which was semi-structured healthcare data. It provided very nicely for the standards that we were working - FHIR - which could be interfaced with JSON and Mongo. It had very good JSON capability and storage. Overall, it was a combination of what we were trying to store and the scalability in terms of being able to store a lot of this information over time.

We were quite happy with the product and the actual use of it. We had no particular problem.

In the future, if they could look into supporting FHIR better. FHIR is a healthcare standard. I don't know what that would mean, but, we had to implement a layer on top of it that implements FHIR. But if MongoDB can look into implementing that would be useful.

The two things that were very important for us were basically performance and compatibility.

I have been using this product for about a year.

It is very stable.

We had issues. It wasn't operationalized yet, but our feeling was that it was easy to set up and easy to operate and very stable. So I would say our compatibility and performance are the two things that came up that I know in the project we had problems with. The rest wasn't at any point an issue.

It's massively scalable. It is very scalable in terms of being able to store a lot of this information over time.

In terms of how many users are using this solution, it was a large database with many objects being pumped into it. But, for our purposes, it was just not necessarily the number of users, but the amount of automation being integrated

It was used by the Provincial department of health, or country. So it was basically the nine provinces in South Africa. And each of them had it. It was all the HIV and TB data for all the departments of health in South Africa. It was big.

I can't recall any issues that our technical team ever had. My feeling was that they were satisfied.

The initial setup was very straightforward. It was a pleasure to work with, for everyone. So setting it up, getting up and running, pumping data into it, and actually looking and querying the data was super simple. We were up and running within an hour. We could literally install and start ingesting information into it from the word go. It was very simple to set up and to have tools to actually query and pump objects into it.

We implemented ourselves.

I would definitely recommend MongoDB. I'm hoping MongoDB will continue to be developed from strength to strength because I think it's an awesome tool. I hope that other products, like DocumentDB, will find a way to work with MongoDB to improve the overall stability of the product. It would be good if other services that host Mongo would become more readily available. It was very useful to actually have a hosted MongoDB set up that is maintained by Mongo Atlas.

I would rate it 9 out of 10 because we had very little issues and it did exactly what we wanted it to do.

MongoDB Atlas was the deployment mechanism we went with and that was hugely helpful for us. MongoDB Atlas is part of the MongoDB suite, I think. It's just a deployment of the Mongo. We also deployed it on Amazon using DocumentDB, but we found that MongoDB Atlas worked better in the end.

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 six 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 use MongoDB mainly on the back end. We use it in my company for the database, and I also use it on my side projects.

MongoDB is a NoSQL tool that gives us much freedom to manipulate how the data works.

MongoDB should support TypeScript.

I have been using MongoDB for about two years.

I haven't had any issues with the solution's stability. However, our company faced an issue where the tool was down for two hours.

I rate the solution’s stability an eight out of ten.

MongoDB is a very scalable solution. About 10,000 users are using the solution in our organization.

I would recommend the solution to other users because it's scalable and easy to learn. The solution's documentation can be rigid and hard to understand initially. Users should use an ORM or ODM. They should use Prisma or Mongoose as the starting point for using MongoDB. MongoDB is easier to manipulate. The easier the onboarding, the harder the maintenance.

Overall, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.

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 find the query and speed very valuable.

The performance of the solution could be improved.

We have been using the solution for approximately four years.

The solution is scalable, and we will gradually increase the amount of data stored in the solution.

The initial setup is a little bit complex for cluster deployment. Deployment took a couple of days, including testing.

The licensing for the solution is free.

I rate the solution a seven out of ten.

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.