MongoDB Enterprise Advanced Reviews

MongoDB's best features are scalability, document management, and data security.

MongoDB would be improved with more integration, particularly for cloud environments like Google BigQuery.

I've been using MongoDB for eight years.

MongoDB's stability is very good.

MongoDB's scalability is one of its best features.

The initial setup was pretty simple.

I would rate MongoDB eight out of ten.

We find the query and speed very valuable.

The performance of the solution could be improved.

We have been using the solution for approximately four years.

The solution is scalable, and we will gradually increase the amount of data stored in the solution.

The initial setup is a little bit complex for cluster deployment. Deployment took a couple of days, including testing.

The licensing for the solution is free.

I rate the solution a seven out of ten.

We are using MongoDB for storing user information and our customer data. If an application requires to save information, that data is stored in MongoDB.

MongoDB has helped my organization by being able to handle large amounts of data. Nowadays, if users are using our application all the data we store in our database. If you're trying to receive the information from the database, it's important we are able to retrieve the result as quickly as possible.

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.

I have been using MongoDB for approximately two years.

The stability of MongoDB is good.

MongoDB is scalable.

We have approximately seven backend developers using this solution.

The MongoDB community support is very good. I was facing some problems using some queries, so I posted my issue on that community channel, and within one day, I received a solution. The support was very quick.

I rate the support from MongoDB a four out of five.

I previously used MySQL and PostgreSQL, but I had permission and licensing issues with MySQL. I prefer MongoDB over others.

The initial setup of MongoDB is straightforward. We only had to use a few commands to install it.

There are different licenses available to be purchased, such as individual, premium, or enterprise.

I did evaluate other options before choosing MongoDB.

Only one person is required for the maintenance of the solution.

I recommend MongoDB to others.

I rate MongoDB a nine out of ten.

 MongoDB has been installed in our active presentation in Google.

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.

MongoDB can improve large-size video or media frame operations. There are a lot of customers who want to upload media frames and video games but there is some difficulty. In MongoDB, we are looking out for solutions that are for large-size media files that can be saved and navigated efficiently.

I have been using MongoDB for approximately one year.

MongoDB is stable. It has been more stable in the cloud than what we experienced when we used it on-premise.

We are using MongoDB in the cloud and it is scalable.

We have approximately two clients using this solution.

The support from MongoDB has been great. We had to work with them during the data validation and support was helpful. There were a lot of people giving revisions during the migration and they were working for every dollar paid. We had a good experience with their technical support team.

The initial setup of MongoDB is a little complex. The setup was not complex but migrating the data from the existing resources to MongoDB was tough because we had to do some migration. If there was a better migration tool it would help.

I would recommend this solution to others. Having the solution in the cloud was a very clean process.

I rate MongoDB a nine out of ten.

We use MongoDB for the applications. You can save two or three applications but there's a lot of people using those applications. 

MongoDB is cool. There is a difference between relational databases and newer databases like MongoDB. MongoDB is scalable and fast.

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.

I have been using MongoDB for about five years.

MongoDB is a stable solution.

MongoDB is a scalable solution.

Customer service depends on your subscription. Suppose it's open-source, then hard luck because you won't get any support. But if you are paying for it, you can get some tech support. However, MongoDB's open-source community is also quite helpful. I'm satisfied with it.

The initial setup is straightforward. 

We implemented this solution by ourselves. One engineer is enough to deploy and maintain this solution.

You only have to pay for the paid version, not the open-source version.

I'll recommend MongoDB to potential users any day.

On a scale from one to ten, I would give MongoDB a nine.

We do payroll for government workers. One service we provide is called e-Payslip. You go into the portal, create an account, and download your payslip for the month. If you have to do something that requires you to submit a payslip, you can go to the portal and get your payslip electronically. 

We also have what we call the ESPV. This allows unit managers to validate workers before they are paid for the month. It's an attempt to remove ghost names from the government payroll, so there's a cycle. At some point, somebody who is actually working must be validated in the system, and then the unit head confirms. This is checked by HR before salaries are paid, so you have to be a validated worker before your salary is paid. 

I think that MongoDB isn't too structured, and that's good for our technical team because they are able to search through the database better than if they are using SQL Server.

I feel that most people don't know a lot about MongoDB, so maybe they could add some more documentation and tutorials. In general, I think they should do more to publicize the solution because when I'm in a meeting and I start talking about migrating to MongoDB, people don't know what I'm talking about.

I've worked with MongoDB for maybe two years. In fact, we recently upgraded and moved everything from SQL Server to Postgres and MongoDB. We went live just about a month ago. This was supposed to be the solution to all our problems, and we are in the process of testing to confirm that we are fine. 

MongoDB is stable. 

We mostly used Microsoft databases in the past. We started with Access and Microsoft SQL Server. I've also used Innovation together with SQL Server.

I'll give MongoDB a 10 out of 10. We are getting positive feedback, so far.

Our main purpose is to build a historical data lake containing commercial data of service usage, products, retailers and wholesalers, AAA sessions, account recharges and transferences, et cetera. We're looking at the whole company's key internet usage data from a commercial perspective. 

The data lake holds data from 5 years, so now we're triggering ML processes. The impact of the product in the community has been huge, and by that I mean, the community of developers that make apps for the telecommunications market. 

In our country, we were pioneers at using MongoDB. Now, at least 7 developer teams are using it.

It fits well. Data we want to keep represents facts. We've ETL'd from operational systems, so there was no need for relational engines. MongoDB allows us, through replication and sharing, to build a robust platform for keeping data. Even when volume starts to be an issue it is really easy to escalate horizontally and connectors do the rest. 

I thought that choosing javascript as the internal query language might be a mistake, but that was a very good choice. 

The fact is all of our users are happy with the stability and quick response times our solutions have. All of them are based on MongoDB as a persistence engine.

MongoDB is very stable, and, by that I mean, amazingly stable. Using javascript was the key to have a wide range of functionalities based on its syntax and grammar. The aggregation framework is really good, allowing a developer to build very complex queries. The fact a developer builds some functions and can run through the whole cluster, actually and efficiently using all the resources available, is a great advantage. It's given the developers a very robust path to building whatever procedures they need. MongoDB is very, very stable.

The product roadmap shows us that the MongoDB team is very professional. Since we started using the product, it's like having wizards that are one step ahead of our needs. They are looking at the community, the market, and the competition. 

From my point of view, they need a totally free IDE to work at high levels. The best I know is Studio3T, but licensing and an embargo in our country make it difficult to access. MongoDB needs something like Studio3T (Compass is just fine, but it isn't Studio3T) to really get the whole developer community.

I've used the solution for more than six years.

We primarily use the solution for long-term storage. We use it to store all our data. We also use it to support microservices that already have calculated data. We don't use it for any other purpose.

The most valuable feature of the solution is the ability to easily store documentation regarding structures. 

We can easily connect to MongoDB and search without transformation, without joining. If we want to use a simple search it's really fast. 

The initial setup isn't really that complex.

The solution is pretty stable overall.

If we want to perform some joins or some other types of transformation that are more advanced, in that case, we cannot use MongoDB. We need to use another solution.

The solution needs to better support modern aspects of search engines. There is typically a microservice layer and MongoDB doesn't support well within search engines. If you want to create some complex structures, you need something like Elasticsearch, for example.

The pricing is expensive.

MongoDB should better support small and medium companies. There are a lot of clients out there that are interested, however, they need something lighter and less complex and something not so expensive upfront. 

I've been using the solution for the past two or three years.

The stability of the solution is very good. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It's pretty good overall.

I've never used technical support. I can't speak to their level of responsiveness or how knowledgeable they are.

We previously mostly used SQL databases. We used Microsoft SQL mostly and we needed some NoSQL databases. That's why we implemented Elasticsearch and MongoDB. We wanted a NoSQL database that we could search, however, was also capable of long-term storage. 

The initial setup is not so complex when we are talking about on-prem solutions. It's an easy initial setup. We are fine with that. 

I was surprised, however, by the lack of support offered during implementation. You are left to your own devices. There isn't much guidance - especially on so complex a transformation.

We have our own agent teams. Mostly we rely on our engineers, not consultants at other companies. We're able to handle everything rather well in-house.

The pricing is quite high and we don't appreciate the solution raising prices so much.

I'm following up with the licensing, however, I don't have the exact figures right now. I mostly advise some companies about that, and usually do not go into detail. What I'm interested in, for example, is when you implement some solution in some company what are the costs for that company in the near future, for example, in one or two years. This is what we are thinking about. 

It's not easy to implement some solutions in some small companies if at the beginning they need to pay some licensing costs upfront. For example, for Mongo DB. It would be easier if the small companies could operate without licensing for some period of time and then only after they grow to a certain size or need they would have to pay some for that usage.

While I may advise clients on MongoDB, I don't have a direct business relationship with the company.

We always use the latest version that is available.

As we implement the solution for clients, we deal with different deployment models. Typically, for banks, for example, the on-premises deployment is used. However, we've looked into the cloud as well and some clients may consider that deployment instead.

A company considering the solution needs to first think about the project and the infrastructure that they need to implement. Every solution is different. I cannot say that I feel some particular way about MongoDB. It always depends on the organizational need. 

I'd rate the solution at a seven out of ten. I'd rate it higher if it offered more upfront support and a lighter solution for smaller organizations. It would be great if they could build an open-source version, for example.

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.

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 is stable.

It is scalable.

I haven't called them ever. I haven't seen any issues, so I would say it's pretty good.

I don't know, but I have heard from people who procure it that it is much cheaper than Oracle.

It is a good tool. You should give it a try. It has a very good and different perspective of looking at how data can be stored in a database and restored from a database because it is not like a straight query or record. The data is just in files. It does whatever a database should do.

I would rate MongoDB a nine out of ten.

We primarily use the solution for web applications.

In our company we decided to invest in the knowledge of an alternative technology to SQL. MongoDB seemed like an obvious choice together with other leading technologies.Furthermore, it is a product that can be intuitive to use unless you come from years of SQL

It has quite good web analytics. It is pretty stable. There is more in-depth management of the data.

It's a NoSQL/Document DB and has some peculiarity related to the data schema but it's also good as a general-purpose DB.

The replication works very well and is in the box. 

In clusters, there is the choice to have horizontal scaling, which improves performance on a huge amount of data.

The aggregation framework is very powerful when elaborating on data. 

It has good high availability.

It's an essential DB. 

It has very good performance for queries.

It is free to use if you choose the community version.

It is stable and reliable.

You can easily scale the solution.

It's quite a good DB that is very strong on a lot of features. 

It is a product that works very well. I don't see a lot of areas that need improvement. 

I've used the solution for five to eight years. I've used it for a while now. 

I'd rate the stability nine or ten out of ten. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze.

I'd rate the scalability nine or ten out of ten. It allows for horizontal scaling, which is quite useful when dealing with big data.

We have about ten people using the solution at this time. One-third of the company ends up using the solution.

We may increase usage. It depends on the business needs. However, in Italy, I have noted MongoDB is expanding.

The technical support is very good but is available only for the enterprise version. 

When I've used other DBs I found them to be inferior.

We have used also Atlas (MongoDB solution for Cloud), and MongoDB has developed a useful framework with lots of new features that are not included in MongoDB's on-premise version. If you choose a cloud DB, it's great if you are looking for a lot of innovative features. 

Many clients use SQL DBs and many are moving over to MongoDB.

The initial setup was pretty straightforward to set up. Compared to other SQL DBs, SQL databases are very complex. MongoDB is ready to go, and you need less operational knowledge. 

I do not invest in MongoDB. However, many customers can save money by leveraging the MongoDB community version. 

The community version is free. The enterprise version is reasonable as MongoDB wants to expand and outpace also SQL DBs. 

I am not using the latest version of the solution. 

Do not think of this solution as a SQL database. Consider your use case and set it up accordingly.

I'd rate the solution ten out of ten. It's the best database on the market.