Google Cloud Spanner vs. MongoDB Atlas

Google Cloud Spanner is suited for limitless horizontal scaling while maintaining strong consistency which needs to support ACID. NoSQL databases work in scaling but no ACID support. RDBMS support ACID, but horizontal scaling is not as great. The API it provides result in some limitations to related areas of the code, such as connection pools or database linking framework. So high # of connection pools can vary.

Incentivized

It is good if you: 1. Have unstructured data that you need to save (since it is NoSQL DB) 2. You don't have time or knowledge to setup the MongoDB Atlas, the managed service is the way to go (Atlas) 3. If you need a multi regional DB across the world

Incentivized

• Super high availability
• Scales automatically
• High standard SLA

Incentivized

• Generous free and trial plan for evaluation or test purposes.
• New versions of MongoDB are able to be deployed with Atlas as soon as they're released—deploying recent versions to other services can be difficult or risky.
• As the key supporters of the open source MongoDB project, the service runs in a highly optimized and performant manner, making it much easier than having to do the work internally.

Incentivized

• Support for Views
• Support for more databases (schemas).
• More index types that can be supported (Functional)
• Backups (ie table/data backup) if data is deleted or truncate by accident.

Incentivized

• For someone new, it could be challenging using MongoDB Atlas. Some official video tutorials could help a lot
• Pricing calculation is sometimes misleading and unpredictable, maybe better variables could be used to provide better insights about the cost
• Since it is a managed service, we have limited control over the instances and some issues we faced we couldn't;'t know about without reaching out to the support and got fixed from their end. So more control over the instance might help
• The way of managing users and access is somehow confusing. Maybe it could be placed somewhere easy to access

Incentivized

I would give it 8. Good stuff: 1. Easy to use in terms of creating cluster, integrating with Databases, setting up backups and high availability instance, using the monitors they provide to check cluster status, managing users at company level, configure multiple replicas and cross region databases. Things hard to use: 1. roles and permissions at DB level. 2. Calculate expected costs

Incentivized

We love MongoDB support and have great relationship with them. When we decided to go with MongoDB Atlas, they sent a team of 5 to our company to discuss the process of setting up a Mongo cluster and walked us through. when we have questions, we create a ticket and they will respond very quickly

Incentivized

At that point, we were looking at something [that] can hold our relational database, [...] provide stable connection, and maintain high ACID transition. BigTable is for nonrelational database so it was out of our [sight] very quickly. BigQuery is a data warehouse that can hold huge amount of data but not ideal for transition. AWS RDS is [...] similar to Spanner but because most of our services are already on GCP, so we went with Spanner.

Incentivized

MongoDB is a great product but on premise deployments can be slow. So we turned to Atlas. We also looked at Redis Labs and we use Redis as our side cache for app servers. But we love using MongoDB Atlas for cloud deployments, especially for prototyping because we can get started immediately. And the cost is low and easy to justify.

Incentivized

• Backups specifically if transactional data is deleted. Restoring made us lose time.
• Sharding on Horizontal level was quick and easy. Deployment and increasing nodes is easy
• Large dataset handling.
• ACID compliance

Incentivized

• Positive - Faster provisioning so we don't have development teams waiting.
• Positive - Automated backups and server management - eliminates need for dedicated DBAs.

Incentivized