Google Cloud SQL vs MongoDB Atlas comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary
 

Categories and Ranking

Google Cloud SQL
Ranking in Database as a Service
4th
Average Rating
8.4
Number of Reviews
18
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
MongoDB Atlas
Ranking in Database as a Service
3rd
Average Rating
8.4
Number of Reviews
46
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of July 2024, in the Database as a Service category, the mindshare of Google Cloud SQL is 19.6%, up from 19.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of MongoDB Atlas is 13.6%, up from 10.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Database as a Service
Unique Categories:
No other categories found
 

Featured Reviews

NB
Feb 12, 2024
Enables us to track the data that we get from external sources
We are tracking because we have an integrated system. We have some integration with external third parties. We also track the data that we get from external sources. In Postgres, we can handle maybe ten million records per month. We use partitioning and healing features to manage this growth in data. Google Cloud SQL provides fast and very short transactions when modifying our data, using Postgres as our database system across multiple ports. It performs queries for data and handles purchases based on those queries. The scalability with Postgres is impressive. Currently, we are in a beta phase, utilizing three instances. There were issues with write and read instances. Also, there were delays in data synchronization between the write and read columns. When data is written to the write instance, it's not always immediately available in the read instance, causing a delay of up to 20 seconds. We have the right systems to manage the necessary operations. Sometimes, we have one instance for handling requests; at other times, we might have more than two instances. Querying the correct data is fast. However, read queries can be slower due to the large amount of data they need to process. We use additional processing power from more instances to accommodate the required scale. Google Cloud SQL is straightforward. The setup and configuration are easy, and managing the team is simple. We have one dedicated person per week to handle incidents or disturbances in the process and perform additional work. It's enough for maintenance and support. As data accumulates, it's crucial to devise a strategy for managing its volume, which involves using historical tables, archiving, or partitioning. These methods are all useful. As the data volume increases, query execution times can slow down. Therefore, it's imperative to implement an effective indexing strategy. By optimizing indexes, partitioning, and other techniques, queries can be executed more efficiently, even when querying on multiple parameters. There could be two or three read instances. The synchronization between the write and the read is very fast. There are multiple advantages to Google Cloud SQL. Firstly, it operates in the cloud, making it accessible from anywhere. Unlike competitors, Google Cloud SQL is fully integrated into the cloud environment. You can quickly scale your resources up or down according to your needs, growing or decreasing. This flexibility allows you to stay aligned with current demands while optimizing costs. Overall, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.
AL
Jan 23, 2024
Easy to scale and offers good performance and stability
It's good for performance and stability if you need a non-SQL database to store data We use it as a database for some of our microservices. We use it as a database for a few of our microservices. The stability and performance are great. The high availability feature is great. Moreover, I am…

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"It is not the cool features that I find valuable, it is the stability of Google Cloud Platform."
"The solution is easy to use. I am impressed with the tool's features and functionality."
"Google Cloud SQL enhances our AI-driven projects by providing features like query optimization and scalability for efficiently processing large datasets."
"The initial setup is straightforward."
"The setup was straightforward. Just a couple of clicks, and we were done."
"Ease of management and the ability to oversee the statistics of your SQL."
"It's SQL. SQL is so easy if you know something about databases. It's easy to learn."
"My suggestion to anyone thinking about this solution is to jump into it head-first!"
"The initial setup of MongoDB Atlas is straightforward...It is a scalable solution."
"There are many valuable features, but scalability stands out. It can scale across zones. You can define multiple nodes. They have also partnered with AWS, offering great service with multiple features, including built-in backup, all under the same roof, without the need for external tools."
"The product allows us to easily set up and store large amounts of unstructured data."
"The speed of it is the most valuable feature."
"The product is user-friendly."
"You can start quickly on projects which allow you to store many things."
"The most beneficial MongoDB features for our workload are the ability to scale up and down using automatic sharding and clustering."
"The auto-scaling feature is the most valuable aspect."
 

Cons

"The purging of the data could be better."
"The monitoring part could be better."
"The most challenging part is dealing with legacy data from your old systems and migrating it into the new setup, but once you've completed the data migration, it becomes quite convenient to use."
"I would like to see better integration with all the different tools on the platform."
"In the case of Google, they need to work on a more easy interface for users."
"The most vulnerable problem with Google SQL is that while you can customize your access control list, it provides you with a public IP address."
"Google Cloud SQL still needs better connectivity to outside, existing data sources."
"The only thing that could be better is the pricing."
"The initial setup is not too difficult but can be somewhat tricky."
"The UI is not currently designed in a manner to make it possible for a non-technical person or a layman to update the database easily."
"If it could be cheaper, that would make us happy."
"The installation was straightforward except for the network hardware because it was a little complicated to make the connection with our VPC on AWS."
"We had some bad trainers when we first came onboard and would rate them fairly low. They did not seem staffed properly to fulfill the training services that they offered."
"An area for improvement in MongoDB Atlas is that it does not support individual or personal database backup, though it supports cloud cluster backup."
"There are some features that could be useful for the customers I work with, which are related to migration from on-prem to the cloud."
"The import and export process needs improvement, i.e., getting in and out. Moving data from other databases into MongoDB, along with indexing, was challenging."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It is not expensive, especially considering the significant reduction in database management time."
"It's really cheap. It wouldn't be more than, I believe it's around 50 euro per month for running a cloud SQL."
"While the platform’s pricing may be higher, it aligns with industry standards, considering the quality of service and features provided."
"The pricing is very much an important factor as to why we use this solution."
"From a financial perspective, Google Cloud SQL is on the cheaper side."
"You need to pay extra costs for backup and replication."
"The solution is affordable."
"For me, MongoDB is expensive, but I think it is not so expensive for customers."
"The pricing is not that expensive, but it can be, especially when we have deployed it across multiple zones."
"The price of MongoDB Atlas is highly affordable."
"MongoDB Atlas is not expensive, and since it's a cloud-based solution, you pay by usage."
"The purchasing process through the AWS Marketplace was very good."
"The pricing and licensing is great."
"It is too expensive. They need to work on this."
"We pay for a license."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Database as a Service solutions are best for your needs.
793,295 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
17%
Computer Software Company
12%
Retailer
10%
Manufacturing Company
6%
Computer Software Company
17%
Financial Services Firm
16%
Manufacturing Company
6%
Educational Organization
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Google Cloud SQL?
The implementation part of the product was easy.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Google Cloud SQL?
While the platform’s pricing may be higher, it aligns with industry standards, considering the quality of service and features provided.
What needs improvement with Google Cloud SQL?
They could improve documentation and dashboard stability for efficient user experience and database management.
What do you like most about MongoDB Atlas?
There are many valuable features, but scalability stands out. It can scale across zones. You can define multiple nodes. They have also partnered with AWS, offering great service with multiple featu...
What needs improvement with MongoDB Atlas?
Searching and browsing through the collection must be made easier.
 

Also Known As

No data available
Atlas
 

Learn More

 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

BeDataDriven, CodeFutures, Daffodil, GenieConnect, KiSSFLOW, LiveHive, SulAm_rica, Zync
Wells Fargo, Forbes, Ulta Beauty, Bosch, Sanoma, Current (a Digital Bank), ASAP Log, SBB, Zebra Technologies, Radial, Kovai, Eni, Accuhit, Cognigy, and Payload.
Find out what your peers are saying about Google Cloud SQL vs. MongoDB Atlas and other solutions. Updated: July 2024.
793,295 professionals have used our research since 2012.