Likelihood to Recommend If asked by a colleague I would highly recommend MongoDB. MongoDB provides incredible flexibility and is quick and easy to set up. It also provides extensive documentation which is very useful for someone new to the tool. Though I've used it for years and still referenced the docs often. From my experience and the use cases I've worked on, I'd suggest using it anywhere that needs a fast, efficient storage space for non-relational data. If a relational database is needed then another tool would be more apt.
Read full review Oracle NoSQL Database is well-suited for you if your data formats are not consistent, if you have limited hardware resources, if you higher data throughput (whether the database is on the cloud or running locally), and if you don't need a declarative query language to maintain a standardized schema of your data. If you need reduced data redundancy and require ACID compliance, you are better off finding an SQL database solution.
Read full review Pros Being a JSON language optimizes the response time of a query, you can directly build a query logic from the same service You can install a local, database-based environment rather than the non-relational real-time bases such a firebase does not allow, the local environment is paramount since you can work without relying on the internet. Forming collections in Mango is relatively simple, you do not need to know of query to work with it, since it has a simple graphic environment that allows you to manage databases for those who are not experts in console management. Read full review Data-model flexibility. Unlike RDBMS solutions, Oracle NoSQL does not restrict you to a predefined set of data types. Ability to Handle an Increased Amount of Traffic. As Oracle NoSQL can process queries much quicker than Oracle Database, Oracle NoSQL is able to respond to a lot more queries in the same amount of time. Data-model simplicity. In SQL-oriented databases, there is a learning curve in learning the relationship between databases, tables, rows, and keys. On the other hand, Oracle NoSQL's key-value based storage is much easier to get the hang of. Read full review Cons An aggregate pipeline can be a bit overwhelming as a newcomer. There's still no real concept of joins with references/foreign keys, although the aggregate framework has a feature that is close. Database management/dev ops can still be time-consuming if rolling your own deployments. (Thankfully there are plenty of providers like Compose or even MongoDB's own Atlas that helps take care of the nitty-gritty. Read full review Fewer analytical functions to choose from. When compared to Oracle Database, there is significant difference in the amount of built-in analytical functions. Eventual data consistency. It is not guaranteed that a write or delete query will be immediately visible for subsequent queries. Data redundancy. As there are no mechanisms that insure data integrity, users are more likely to have redundant data across their documents. Read full review Likelihood to Renew I am looking forward to increasing our SaaS subscriptions such that I get to experience global replica sets, working in reads from secondaries, and what not. Can't wait to be able to exploit some of the power that the "Big Boys" use MongoDB for.
Read full review Usability NoSQL database systems such as MongoDB lack graphical interfaces by default and therefore to improve usability it is necessary to install third-party applications to see more visually the schemas and stored documents. In addition, these tools also allow us to visualize the commands to be executed for each operation.
Read full review Support Rating Finding support from local companies can be difficult. There were times when the local company could not find a solution and we reached a solution by getting support globally. If a good local company is found, it will overcome all your problems with its global support.
Read full review Implementation Rating While the setup and configuration of MongoDB is pretty straight forward, having a vendor that performs automatic backups and scales the cluster automatically is very convenient. If you do not have a system administrator or DBA familiar with MongoDB on hand, it's a very good idea to use a 3rd party vendor that specializes in MongoDB hosting. The value is very well worth it over hosting it yourself since the cost is often reasonable among providers.
Tom Maiaroto Sr. Platform Developer / UX Designer / Optimization Engineer
Read full review Alternatives Considered We have [measured] the speed in reading/write operations in high load and finally select the winner = MongoDBWe have [not] too much data but in case there will be 10 [times] more we need
Cassandra .
Cassandra 's storage engine provides constant-time writes no matter how big your data set grows. For analytics, MongoDB provides a custom map/reduce implementation;
Cassandra provides native Hadoop support.
Read full review I have not used any other types of NoSQL databases.
Read full review Return on Investment Open Source w/ reasonable support costs have a direct, positive impact on the ROI (we moved away from large, monolithic, locked in licensing models) You do have to balance the necessary level of HA & DR with the number of servers required to scale up and scale out. Servers cost money - so DR & HR doesn't come for free (even though it's built into the architecture of MongoDB Read full review We pay less for computing resources, as Oracle NoSQL databases respond quicker than our previous SQL databases. Our database administrators and software developers do not need to worry about "data massaging" and can focus on perfecting application logic. Oracle NoSQL has built-in integration to other Oracle products, so we didn't not need to spend money on building custom integrators or higher additional developers. Read full review ScreenShots