MongoDB Atlas Reviews

We create a MongoDB database or clusters. Then, we connect it to the application in a normal simple way.

The dynamic structures are the most valuable. The SQL is fast but requires a different structure.

The speed when combining two documents is concerning. In SQL, there are Joins. You can define relationships between two tables and go for complicated structures, but you can't do that for MongoDB Atlas. You can have logical structures that do the same thing, but they are really slow compared to the Joins in SQL. Combining two separate documents within a database is not recommended because it affects performance. So if they can make it faster and more efficient, it would be amazing.

We have been using this solution for 15 months. I believe it is deployed on public cloud, AWS.

It is a stable solution. 

It is scalable, and they provide different options. We have about 20 people using the solution in our organization, and they are mostly developers.

The initial setup was straightforward.

I believe when it is deployed publicly, it is pretty cheap. But the costs are high if it is deployed on-premises or you're using a private database.

We decided to use MongoDB Atlas because we required some dynamic data structures. We never wanted to stick with a well-defined one. When there were questions about using well-defined ones, PostgreSQL turned out to be one of the choices, but we chose MongoDB Atlas.

I rate the solution an eight out of ten because it's a good product. It supports many functionalities, is easier to implement, and the only issue is speed. It also doesn't have a lot of features that could support Joins. So if they fix that, I could scale my rating as high as nine or ten. I would recommend the solution. It is very developer-friendly, and the learning curve is not that high.

For MongoDB as a service, there are two distinct ways to use it: as a personal user, where one can register on Atlas and experiment with its features; and as a professional, where one can use it for backup management, environment management, and creating figures. Additionally, MongoDB Atlas has features such as data lake capability, the ability to create charts from queries without using other BI tools, and Apache Lucene for text search. I have experimented with these features, but I have not used them professionally. The most relevant use for me is managing backups. Atlas MongoDB also allows for making REST calls and creating applications with triggers, although I have not used it for programming applications much.

The most useful feature is the management of the backup. I use a managed tool offered by MongoDB to manage an on-prem environment and compare it with the SaaS service and software. The solution is very ready-to-use and it is much simpler to manage backups, which cuts down on the amount of work and stress. It is much easier for me to do, and I understand that Atlas MongoDB has many features. However, for the type of DBIR work I do, backup management is the most important feature.

There are some Mongo new features that could be useful for the customers I work with, which are related to migration from on-prem to the cloud. MongoDB is currently working on these features. With the latest version of Mongo, there are new tools that help with migrating. However, currently, only Mongo can use these new features. Soon these migration tools should be released to the public and could really assist with migration also from SQL on-prem environment to Atlas.

I have been using the solution for four years.

The solution is very stable.

I give the scalability a nine out of ten. MongoDB is very easy to scale and with Atlas, it is possible with a few clicks and configurations.

The technical support team is skilled, prepared, and really helpful.

Positive

The initial setup is straightforward. Only one person is required for deployment.

For me, MongoDB Atlas could be expensive as every cloud service because I don't have many other terms of comparison, but I think it is not so expensive for customers. In the end, they may be able to save money rather than buy it on-premise however, on-premise, they do not have access to all the features that Atlas exposes. The costs are similar to having a cloud provider and if we look at the short-term, there is a real saving of money investing in their service instead of making it on-prem in the same scenario.

I give the solution an eight out of ten. I am not familiar with other SQL databases on the cloud. I know that Atlas is quite stable and the service is good, providing customers with all the necessary features to use it as a service. MongoDB Atlas is integrated and available on Google, AWS, and Azure.

I advise people to take advantage of the free courses from MongoDB University that are very well done to gain a general knowledge of MongoDB. Therefore, if someone has no experience with Mongo, they can get great preparation for the MongoDB University course without spending any money.

There are many scenarios that MongoDB can fit into, like where there is a fluid schema and no transaction management.

This solution is deployed on a cloud and AWS is the provider.

It's flexible. We don't need to have a solid upstream availability failover, and everything is seamless in Atlas. They do all the replication, and all that is probably happening behind the scenes. The pricing isn't that high compared to any of the IBM products.

The biggest challenge we all have is an application layer level. One node is sitting in the APAC region, another node is sitting in the US and UK region. The seamless replication has to be lightning fast, but we haven't tested the scalability yet.

There's no straight answer for any of the database providers in that particular space. We don't have a failover, but when it comes to the RPA recovery point objective and RTO, we have to test it.

Atlas should think about a provision in the form of a commitment. You can ask for a longer commitment. Database is one thing. Once I build an application, if it goes to production, it's going to be there for the next 10 years minimum. In that way, somebody's giving you a commitment for five years, so you can give them a huge discount. If somebody's giving a two year commitment, you can give them a better discount. 

I've been using this solution for about six months. 

It's stable.

I haven't used this solution long enough to gauge the scalability. 

We haven't had any issues so far.

It's straightforward and seamless. Setting up takes about 35 minutes, but it could be as little as 20 minutes. We never had a concern with installation. Maybe when you're doing a data migration, that could be a different story altogether.

In development, we have about 15 users. The number of users could go up to 100,000 people because it's an application that we're building. We're building the system for 100,000 concurrent users.

We have the possibility of growing every year on year, probably 30%. We are going to test it to see if we can host multiple tenants in this single DB and if it will be scalable.

We pay for the license on a monthly basis. It's not cheap or expensive. For smaller companies, it's definitely expensive.

I would rate this solution 8 out of 10.

I would recommend this solution to those who want to start using it.

We use it for hosting data on the cloud.

It enables us to get work done quickly and get to our data. It benefits us by providing performance.

• As a user, it is very easy to use. There is nothing complicated.
• We can write queries and go through it very quickly; our queries are quicker with it. 
• Many tools are there. Other companies are providing many tools for getting to your MongoDB.

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. However, it has been improving.

I would like them to make the product easier to use.

We are happy right now with stability unless something goes wrong down the line. In that case, you have to bite the bullet.

In terms of workloads, we put 60 to 80 percent on it.

So far, so good. However, we have had issues with our VPC, and how we have stored on S3 and our instances that we have with MongoDB. We are learning as we are building more capacity.

Our environment is utility customers, which is millions of meters, and each one has their own instance. We obtain that data for every 15 minutes in a big city environment, which is why performance is very important.

The technical support is good. We have received very good feedback.

The integration and configuration were pretty easy. We loved it. Otherwise, we would have changed databases.

We have definitely seen ROI.

The purchasing process through the AWS Marketplace was very good.

I was involved later on in the evaluation process when we were looking to import and export data out of MongoDB. We looked at MySQL, but we wanted to be on the cloud instead of managing our data on MySQL.

I would recommend it. It is better than the legacy databases, and it is very good with the cloud.

We integrated it with TestRail and JIRA. Everything is on cloud. It integrates well, and we are happy with it.

I use the solution for Web Application creation.

The solution is easily scalable and manageable. Tools can be easily added to the solution.

Customer support needs improvement knowledge-wise.

I have been using the solution for two years.

It is a stable solution. I rate the stability a ten out of ten.

It is a scalable solution. I rate it ten out of ten.

I rate the support an eight out of ten.

The initial setup is straightforward. The deployment takes three hours. I rate the initial setup a ten out of ten.

I have seen a 10% return on investment.

The solution is fairly priced. I rate the pricing a seven out of ten. 

I rate the overall solution an eight out of ten.

We use the solution to build applications online.

I would like to have better performance for user experience with the solution.

I have been using the solution for one and a half years.

The initial setup is straightforward.

I give the solution an eight out of ten.

We have eight to ten people using the solution in our organization.

I recommend the solution. There are no problems with MongoDB Atlas

We use it for all of our temporary data, anything which is not warehoused.

It works with AWS Lamda and EC2.

It is nice because our developers create tables whenever they need to sync data. There are allocations nor DBAs. It is just use it as you need it.

• Autoscaling
• No overhead
• No maintenance

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.

It is very stable. It has been running without issues.

We have about 2000 customers a day.

The pricing is good. We originally chose it over DynamoDB because of the pricing.

We also looked at DynamoDB from Amazon. However, it didn't have the features that we wanted from MongoDB.

We chose MongoDB based on its pricing and features.

I have been happy with the service. Everything is good. Though, nothing stands out to me as exceptional. 

I would encourage someone to look at DynamoDB, even though I am fine with MongoDB. If you are in a fully integrated into the AWS environment, you might want to stick with Amazon Web Services rather than a third-party.

We use it as a service, so we don't configure anything.

Any business types where we need instructional data.

In a previous company where I worked, we were able to use MongoDB as a pure data storage using the block storage mechanism for our clients.

You can start quickly on projects which allow you to store many things.

I would like a more comprehensive dashboard. The UI can be difficult to understand.

Going forward, we would like to have pure AWS Cloud (native) storage instead regular storage on the AWS integration side.

The stability is very good.

In my previous company, we had a lot of data coming in every day, and the product remained stable.

We have been able to scale from gigabytes to terabytes easily.

I have never used technical support.

The integration and configuration of MongoDB in the AWS environment is quite good.

In my previous company, the product allowed use to build a database in a highly regulated environment with the ability to get distributed storage. We used MongoDB as a distributed storage to set up this environment for a critical business application with millions of dollars.

My advice is make developers understand NoSQL databases. For people coming from the SQL world, this is a new way to develop applications and that is the point to focus on. In the NoSQL world, MongoDB is a product that has a good awareness and has proven to be very good.

Our clients also evaluate Cassandra or other key value storage vendors. Its depends on what they want to do exactly. MongoDB is somewhere in the middle between pure key value and something like Cassandra, which is designed for bigger deployments.

MongoDB is fortunately well known now in the development community and has a good framework for languages, which is why our clients chose the product.

We are always integrating this product with our business applications because it is a database. Without our applications, the product doesn't make sense. The integration is quite straightforward, because of the consistences within MongoDB, you can find where to connect it.

I have used both the AWS and the on-premise versions. The AWS integration allows you to go faster in terms of deployment and the tooling in the cloud also allows you to go faster.