We performed a comparison between Cloudera Distribution for Hadoop and MongoDB based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two NoSQL Databases solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."It has the best proxy, security, and support features compared to open-source products."
"I don't see any performance issues."
"We had a data warehouse before all the data. We can process a lot more data structures."
"The data science aspect of the solution is valuable."
"Very good end-to-end security features."
"In terms of scalability, if you have enough hardware you can scale out. Scalability doesn't have any issues."
"The solution is stable."
"The file system is a valuable feature."
"It can handle a lot of files quickly."
"MongoDB is flexible and it allows other applications to be added."
"I like the schemaless architecture that it follows. I also like the sharding that it provides."
"The most valuable feature of MongoDB is the ease of connections, aggregation, and queries."
"The most valuable features of MongoDB are the variety of translations available and the ability to deploy it on the cloud is useful. The cloud users can access the data, work on the data, and if they want to import or manipulate some data they can."
"One of the biggest benefits is the speed and flexibility of the documents, especially when it comes to modifications."
"MongoDB has a simple data-loading interface."
"MongoDB is simpler to learn and implement than traditional SQL solutions like MySQL."
"There are multiple bugs when we update."
"Cloudera Distribution for Hadoop has a limited feature list and a lot of costs involved."
"The competitors provide better functionalities."
"The tool's ability to be deployed on a cloud model is an area of concern where improvements are required."
"The Cloudera training has deteriorated significantly."
"There are better solutions out there that have more features than this one."
"The one thing that we struggled with predominately was support. Because it was relatively new, support was always a big issue and I think it's still a bit of an ongoing concern with the team currently managing it."
"The user infrastructure and user interface needs to be improved, as well as the performance. The GUI needs to be better."
"Our program developer finds it to be a little unstable, development-wise."
"I feel that most people don't know a lot about MongoDB, so maybe they could add some more documentation and tutorials."
"There should be better integration with other databases."
"Simplifying the aggregation framework would be an improvement."
"The transaction could use improvement. From MySQL, for example, you cannot create a transaction if you are reading and writing a document at the same time."
"We'd like technical support to respond faster to queries."
"There can be stability issues."
"It isn't easy to recognize entities with MongoDB."
More Cloudera Distribution for Hadoop Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cloudera Distribution for Hadoop is ranked 5th in NoSQL Databases with 47 reviews while MongoDB is ranked 1st in NoSQL Databases with 69 reviews. Cloudera Distribution for Hadoop is rated 8.0, while MongoDB is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Cloudera Distribution for Hadoop writes "Good end-to-end security features and we like that it's cloud independent". On the other hand, the top reviewer of MongoDB writes "Lightweight with good flexibility and very fast performance for searching data". Cloudera Distribution for Hadoop is most compared with Amazon EMR, HPE Ezmeral Data Fabric, Apache Spark, Cassandra and InfluxDB, whereas MongoDB is most compared with InfluxDB, Couchbase, ScyllaDB, Oracle NoSQL and Apache HBase. See our Cloudera Distribution for Hadoop vs. MongoDB 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.
