4 ms·
Other than multi-document transactions, many of the changes to MongoDB since 3.6 are to do with performance and scaling - this is AWS' bread and butter. Someth
by duggan 8y ago
Other than multi-document transactions, many of the changes to MongoDB since 3.6 are to do with performance and scaling - this is AWS' bread and butter.
Something to consider is how many applications depends on cutting edge database features. Developers often consider a database an object persistence mechanism whose details are to be tidied away. See, for example, the emphasis on database portability in ORMs.
MongoDB's most effective enterprise offering is support, in my opinion. They know their database well, which can make a big difference if your company is heavily reliant on it.
I suspect for many users though, AWS support will be good enough. Presumably, that's the danger to MongoDB.
- merlynn 8y agoIn the spirit of complete transparency, I work at MongoDB. Depending on users' specific needs and the features of MongoDB they use, the differences could go quite a bit further than 'just' support. Some of the important differences to keep in mind include regional availability and approaches to resiliency (Atlas allows you to scale beyond a single node and offers multi-region clusters; DocumentDB limits you to a single primary), role-based access control (DocumentDB currently only supports user that has full access to all databases in a cluster; MongoDB allows fine-grained control), freedom from vendor lock-in (With MongoDB you can always choose to host your own clusters whereas DocumentDB does not afford you this option). These are only a few of the differences between the hosting platforms, on top of that, you would, of course, be limited to an incomplete set of features (https://docs.aws.amazon.com/documentdb/latest/developerguide/mongo-apis.html https://docs.aws.amazon.com/documentdb/latest/developerguide...) compared to MongoDB 3.6 and you would be missing out on improvements available in MongoDB 4.0 and future versions.