MongoDB Reviews

We use MongoDB mainly for data visualization and filtering purposes.

MongoDB's most valuable feature is data visualization.

They could provide more documentation and examples for adding pipeline stages. There could be a feature where commands made in MongoDB could be easily copied and shared in their original format. This functionality would enable seamless transition and compatibility between platforms like Linux and mobile devices, reducing the need for complex filters or Citrix-based solutions.

We have been using MongoDB for five months.

I rate the platform's stability a nine out of ten.

My department has around 50 MongoDB users.

It is a cloud-based version and is simple to deploy.

We evaluated OracleDB and MongoDB. We decided to work with MongoDB as its interface is easier to understand and more universal. It offers ease of integration and simpler configurations compared to OracleDB. It also provides all the essential functionality.

I rate MongoDB a nine out of ten.

My use case for MongoDB is storing logs. Last semester, I worked on a malware and antivirus project, used the deep learning model based on the logs and data from the IDF and FreeRTOS, and stored the logs in MongoDB in a different file.

I store logs in MongoDB for later use, and then I can retrieve the logs and create a model accordingly.

I found that MongoDB is most valuable for storing school-related queries. It's also user-friendly, and I found no difficulty accessing it. Setting it up is easy too.

MongoDB could be more secure.

I've been using MongoDB for one year, but I'm not into creating a full-stack application in MongoDB.

MongoDB is a scalable solution. However, if it's loaded with queries, I can use Docker.

I've never contacted the MongoDB technical support team.

I have experience with MySQL and PostgreSQL, but I'm entirely focused on deep learning, so my team only uses MongoDB and Databricks. I'm not into complicated products, and I know what I can do with MongoDB and how to do it.

The initial setup for MongoDB is basic. It's not complex, but I didn't deploy MongoDB directly into AWS. I used AWS to access the database.

I'm using the free version of MongoDB.

I'm using the database MongoDB.

I'm probably using the latest version of MongoDB because I'm using the latest version of Docker.

I have a team of three working on a project that uses MongoDB.

I recommend MongoDB to others. In my college, almost everyone uses it.

My rating for MongoDB is nine out of ten.

I work with multiple personal applications, and for that, I use MongoDB and SQL Servers. Depending on the use cases, I choose MongoDB, as it is not a heavy application. Usually, I use MongoDB for attachment sections because RDBMS is heavy for attachment software. I also use it for assessments. Sometimes, I store data for a time-series database, such as stock market data, which I analyze using MongoDB.

Feature-wise, I like how MongoDB stores attachments because it allows me to store the results of the attachment and pull them up whenever needed instead of having to generate them every time. I can save those results as PDFs and other formats rather than just saving the data and then having to regenerate it. This approach enables me to analyze the attachments and research existing data, making it easier to retrieve information when needed. Overall, MongoDB has helped manage and analyze attachment data.

I cannot comment on how to improve the database since I am not an expert in that field. It is important to note that MongoDB has limitations since it can only be used for specific use cases. For example, for master data, I would want to pick keys using an RDBMS, but for attachments, I would choose MongoDB. Other than that, I am more familiar with RDBMS databases.

I have experience with MongoDB for three to four years and am an end-user of the solution.

It is a stable solution. Stability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

It is a highly scalable solution. In fact, a friend of mine who works as a stock market analyst and operates using one of the popular websites in India also uses MongoDB for his work and finds it very efficient. Scalability-wise, I would rate the solution a nine out of ten. From my end, only four to five people use the solution, but from my organization's perspective, around 500 users are utilizing it.

We used to handle technical support ourselves, as the tool was easy to handle, and we didn't need any special assistance. Although we never had to interact with technical support, I would rate it a nine out of ten.

Positive

Previously, I used RDBMS but found it a bit slower. That's why I switched to MongoDB for analytics purposes. I had also tried using MySQL long back before using ClickHouse, but after that, I didn't use MySQL again. While using MySQL earlier, I faced some performance issues while writing a lot of entries. So I shifted to MongoDB, which has been working well for me. Although MySQL is an open-source solution, its performance was lagging. I also tried using Oracle, but it was a costlier option.

The initial setup of MongoDB was easy for me, and I found the community support to be very helpful. I rate the initial setup process a nine out of ten. The deployment process was also quick and only took a day or less. All that was required was to install the solution, which didn't take much time. I deployed the solution on my own, and it doesn't require any maintenance. As a friend and I only use it, it is for personal use only.

I chose MongoDB because it is cost-effective compared to Oracle, which can be expensive. In addition, MongoDB has good performance and has not caused any issues while working with it. It has been a good choice for me.

I recommend MongoDB because I haven't experienced any issues with it so far. Therefore, I would definitely recommend it to others. I wouldn't give the tool a ten out of ten since there is always room for improvement. I rate the overall solution 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.

MongoDB is a document database that we use for internet applications, logs, and all kinds of things that need quick answers, especially in the document area.

I like that MongoDB has a free version. You can also buy the enterprise edition, which is cheaper than Oracle.

It could be more stable. It would be better if it were more user-friendly like Oracle, which is very easy. For example, creating an index is simple in Oracle. In MongoDB, it's quite challenging to do that.

Performance could be better. It's fast and good, but you cannot put every application that you would like to in MongoDB.

I've been using MongoDB for two or three years.

MongoDB isn't stable like Oracle, but it's okay.

MongoDB is a scalable solution. MongoDB has its own problems, but if you have good maintenance, it's okay. Since it's for internet applications, we can have tens of thousands or hundred thousand users.

There is no technical support since it's a community-supported database. If you would like to buy services like that, there are companies which sell that. But it's not like Microsoft or Oracle, where you have an option of buying support. Instead, there are third-party companies that are willing to provide support for a lot of money.

We switched from Oracle to MongoDB because of costs. Oracle also has a MongoDB solution inside it. In Oracle, you can install document databases, which helps, and it also supports JSON and just about everything. It's one-to-one. Whatever you do in MongoDB, you can do it in Oracle. But Oracle isn't free.

The main problem with Oracle today is the price. Many companies around the world are trying to move out of Oracle because of the cost. They are not moving because the database is not good. PostgreSQL is really like Oracle, and MongoDB is like Redis, and all these have free community databases. If you want to buy the enterprise edition, it costs a bit but not as much as Oracle.

The initial setup is straightforward. Even building the cluster and so on isn't a problem. But you have to know what to do because it's a bit different from relational databases. It only takes a couple of hours and not more than that. Once you have the right servers, firewalls, ports open, and so on, you're good to go.

One or two people are enough to maintain this database. But you'll need more people like programmers for the digital part of the application that you have to develop. 

I implemented this solution by myself.

MongoDB has a free version. You can also buy the enterprise edition, which is cheaper than Oracle.

I would recommend MongoDB to potential users depending on their requirements because it's not a relational database. It depends on what applications would they would like to put in it.

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

I think that MongoDB's search engine should be improved.

My impression is that this is a stable product.

My impression is that this is a scalable product.

When it comes to technical support, I am the same as our reseller. I use community help and google.

My impression is that the initial setup is straightforward.

MongoDB is a fast and safe solution.

I would rate this solution as a whole a seven, on a scale from one to 10, with one being the worst and 10 being the best.

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.

Migrating to MongoDB upgrades the IT environment and puts users in the NoSQL environment, which is faster.

There are some problems with bugs appearing in sharding when the data is too high. MongoDB also needs to update and be more flexible to match up to more mature products like Oracle or SQL.

I've been using MongoDB for three years.

MongoDB is stable and reliable.

MongoDB is scalable.

MongoDB's technical support is quite good.

Previously, I used AWS DocumentDB and DynamoDB.

The initial setup was straightforward, and deployment took around two hours.

We did the implementation ourselves.

MongoDB is a bit expensive compared to its competitors.

I would advise anyone thinking of implementing MongoDB to test the sharding and duplication concepts in your environment with a huge number of data to see how it will work with multiple scenarios or test cases. I would give MongoDB a rating of ten out of ten.