We performed a comparison between IBM Netezza Performance Server 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."The underlying hardware that IBM provides with this appliance is made for a specific purpose, to serve performance on a large amount of data, and to do analytics as well. It is faster, when you compare it to any other product."
"The most valuable features of the IBM Netezza Performance Server are the NPS server because of the reduced maintenance and overall good performance."
"Distribution concurrency control."
"The most valuable feature would be the fact that it has been running for awhile in an appliance format."
"IBM Netezza Performance Server is a cost-effective solution."
"The data governance prospect... from what I've seen, that is a really powerful tool as well, to help with data lineage and keeping track of that."
"The performance is most important to me, and it helps our ability to make business decisions quickly."
"We are able to execute very complex queries. Over 90 percent of our query executions are one second or less. We do millions of queries everyday."
"It's easy to add and remove things in MongoDB. You can alter the tables. MongoDB is faster at reading, slower at writings."
"The most valuable feature of MongoDB is the NoSQL database. In a SQL database, we need to join data together with a unique ID amongst other things, but in MongoDB, it's not required. We can directly receive all the information. The performance is very good. Additionally, they have frequent updates."
"Sharding is an excellent feature of MongoDB."
"It's super easy to develop a couple of solutions for clients with MongoDB, like a quick web page with no clear data structure that they need to spin up quickly to validate some sort of MDTP."
"The solution's most important aspect is its seamless database."
"It is convenient to use because we can do manipulations with the JSON data that we get. There are also a lot of joins and associations with MongoDB, which makes it easy to use for us."
"MongoDB is simpler to learn and implement than traditional SQL solutions like MySQL."
"It stores historical data with ease. For example, if you are a healthcare member, then you will have multiple records of visits to the doctors. To store such data in Oracle Database, you have to create many records. You might also have duplication problems because your records are going in again and again, because of which the data warehouse and the maintenance cost will be huge. MongoDB is comparatively lightweight. It is a JSON extract. Once you define a schema and extract it, you can push all the relationships in any way you want. It is easier to define and get different types of transactions into MongoDB. It is also easier to set it up as compared to other solutions. MongoDB is a NoSQL database, which means it is a document DB in which you can store documents that you created in BSON. It is pretty fast in response. It is faster than relational databases because it does not define any primary keys, secondary keys, tertiary keys, and all those kinds of things."
"The only issue is that it's not expandable."
"Concurrency limit needs to be increased somewhat."
"The scalability is not as expected. The capacity in the black box is not enough."
"In terms of features that I would like to see, one is the ability to actually scale out an architecture. Right now, if you buy one, it's fixed. There is no scale-up availability at all."
"IBM Netezza Performance Server could improve its interface, support for big data, and APA-based connectivity should be available."
"LIke Teradata, we can’t add a node/SPU to the existing appliance."
"We are not able to scale. The only way to scale is to get another appliance, but we have a customers who would need us to hydrate the data between the two appliances, and Netezza does not do that."
"Oracle Exadata's security features, like TDE encryption, are missing in IBM Netezza Performance Server."
"It could be much more flexible like SequoiaDB. I would like to see more flexibility in the next release, especially when working with Microsoft Windows. A lot of people struggle with MongoDB because of their Windows versions. But Linux is faultless and mostly runs nicely."
"There are some problems with bugs appearing in sharding when the data is too high."
"I'd like to see an ID generator. It's very technical but I don't think it has one, so we have to go to great lengths to work around that."
"Simplifying the aggregation framework would be an improvement."
"I don't see a lot of areas that need improvement."
"It would be good to have scalability for clusters. For example, if we have three clusters, we should be able to increase to five clusters if required. I am not sure if such a feature is currently there. I hope there is good documentation for this."
"They could improve the UI and the analytics part."
"I feel that most people don't know a lot about MongoDB, so maybe they could add some more documentation and tutorials."
More IBM Netezza Performance Server Pricing and Cost Advice →
IBM Netezza Performance Server is ranked 10th in Data Warehouse with 33 reviews while MongoDB is ranked 1st in NoSQL Databases with 68 reviews. IBM Netezza Performance Server is rated 8.0, while MongoDB is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of IBM Netezza Performance Server writes "A cost-effective data warehousing tool, but security features like TDE encryption are missing". On the other hand, the top reviewer of MongoDB writes "Lightweight with good flexibility and very fast performance for searching data". IBM Netezza Performance Server is most compared with Oracle Exadata, Oracle Database, Snowflake, Teradata and SQL Server, whereas MongoDB is most compared with InfluxDB, Couchbase, ScyllaDB, Oracle NoSQL and Cassandra. See our IBM Netezza Performance Server 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.
