We performed a comparison between MarkLogic 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."MarkLogic's greatest asset is its strong engineering foundation. It was specifically designed with search capabilities in mind, and the developers placed a great emphasis on ensuring the quality of the indexing and all subsequent layers that were added."
"The rules can show us if there are missing items, like titles, and we can add them in to ensure everything is filled and makes sense and there are no missing details."
"The solution is user-friendly with a good object retrieval feature."
"It is a stable solution. Stability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten...Overall, MongoDB has helped manage and analyze attachment data."
"MongoDB is simpler to learn and implement than traditional SQL solutions like MySQL."
"It is very easy to create a MongoDB cluster. You can deploy three nodes in one hour. You can do small configurations to enable routing. It is easy to implement."
"The installation is very easy to do and understand."
"MongoDB is relatively fast compared to relational databases."
"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 is the geometric information done with GeoJSON."
"One of the most common requests is to improve the user interface of the database. While it is primarily a database, there are other databases available that offer more user-friendly interfaces. The UI is good for developers but not for regular users. More visuals would be beneficial."
"The spreadsheet capabilities could be improved."
"A normal Oracle or database tester will take some time to gear up to MongoDB because the way of writing queries is different in MongoDB. There should be some kind of midway where a person who is coming from an Oracle background can write a query and get a response by using something like a select * statement or other such things. There should be some way for MongoDB to interpret these commands rather than making a person learn MongoDB commands and writing them. I struggled while writing these MongoDB commands. I had not seen such queries before. It was pretty difficult to get them. This is one of the areas where it would help from the improvement standpoint."
"It isn't easy to recognize entities with MongoDB."
"It would be much more useful if I have an admin user and a password."
"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."
"The dashboard is an area of concern in the solution where improvements are required."
"It has certain limitations when it comes to handling hierarchical data, enforcing relationships, and performing complex joins, which should be taken into account when designing databases for applications with intricate data requirements."
"The solution should have better integration."
"The performance could be faster."
MarkLogic is ranked 9th in NoSQL Databases with 2 reviews while MongoDB is ranked 1st in NoSQL Databases with 69 reviews. MarkLogic is rated 9.6, while MongoDB is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of MarkLogic writes "Frequent updates, helpful search capabilities, and high quality support". On the other hand, the top reviewer of MongoDB writes "Lightweight with good flexibility and very fast performance for searching data". MarkLogic is most compared with Cassandra, whereas MongoDB is most compared with InfluxDB, Couchbase, ScyllaDB and Oracle NoSQL. See our MarkLogic 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.