10 ms·

FerretDB: A truly open-source MongoDB alternative

136 points by kiyanwang 5y ago

kellengreen 5y ago
Perhaps I'm just being naive, bug I still fail to understand the animosity towards the SSPL license.
- hkt 5y ago
  My issue is more with the software than the license - I'm comfortable running postgres at scale, less so mongodb. This will be great for people like me and widen the range of software that I can use off the shelf.
  - stingraycharles 5y ago
    I don’t understand, your problem isn’t with the license but the software, but you don’t explain why you prefer FerretDB’s software? Is it more reliable than MongoDB?
- 2Gkashmiri 5y ago
  correct me if i am wrong but imo sspl is a superset of AGPL, because i have read somewhere that agpl fails if kept behind an api. you don't need to publish source and all that. the problem with non-sspl licenses is, lets say with bsd, that you give the downstream developer the right to decide if your work is part of software which gives source to users when the concern of "Free software" is that end users MUST be given source. when it comes to cloud providers, even if this agpl license is true, google already bans AGPL software but not aws but i'm not sure but that means they dictate to the end user with vendor lock-in and stuff. anyways SSPL aims to accomodate even this loophole by making sure if you are a provider, you have to provide source code to ALL software you use. this means, for an end user you can't be forced into a small free software carrot but still subject to rest of closed source. i'd say this is a win-win for end users, intermediaries and developers don't matter when it comes to freedoms of end users
  - yessirwhatever 5y ago
    In the words of Matthew Garrett "There are many AGPL projects where you literally can't pay someone money to avoid the AGPL. There are zero SSPL projects in the same position." https://twitter.com/mjg59/status/1354698533094318082 https://twitter.com/mjg59/status/1354698533094318082
    - teddyh 5y ago
      I would assume that this is a good thing.
  - remram 5y ago
    "All rights reserved" is a subset of AGPL. We're just not sure how far from AGPL the SSPL actually fall, because it is worded ambiguously. In practice the original claimed aim of the license does not matter that much. Thankfully there are other licenses similar to AGPL, like BSL.
- pydry 5y ago
  FAANG are pretty explicit about hating AGPL and SSPL coz they kind of target them. That leads to a lot of second order animosity.
  - threeseed 5y ago
    It makes no sense to use FAANG in this context. It's the cloud providers that are the target of the license, specifically AWS.
    - junon 5y ago
      One of the "A"s in "FAANG" is the same "A" in "AWS", so it does indeed make some sense.
      - Sosh101 5y ago
        And Google (GCP).
        jaywalk 5y ago
        But not Microsoft, to which Google is a distant third place as far as the cloud goes.
    - philote 5y ago
      Plus, isn't it MAANA now? (Meta and Alphabet)
- strken 5y ago
  I'm wary of it because "make the functionality of the Program or a modified version available to third parties as a service" is vague. If I have a web app that persists data in MongoDB and lets users query it in a complicated way[0], but doesn't provide an outright MongoDB-as-a-service implementation, it's still arguably making its functionality available. I don't trust them to enforce the edge cases fairly. [0] For example, a custom report builder for an inventory management system, or a query builder for a CRM
  - pydry 5y ago
    This sounds like the least arguable edge case possible even if they were interested in chasing it (which they wouldnt be).
    - d3nj4l 5y ago
      Although I admit that it's unlikely they will sue you for a product that isn't just a database, you shouldn't build your product on the (perceived) goodwill of the MongoDB developers.
      - erezsh 5y ago
        Meanwhile, half the world start-ups base their entire tech stack on the goodwill of amazon and google, not to pull the rug from under them in hundreds of legal ways.
        jaywalk 5y ago
        Using your definition of "goodwill" means basically everything on the Internet is based on the goodwill of some other entity. I think that paying for a service pretty clearly moves it out of the "goodwill" category.
    - salmo 5y ago
      They wouldn't be... until they go under. Then the vultures will be happy to shake folks down to pay for the licensed version or a law suit. Merit doesn't really matter, they have a claim and fighting it will cost you. They'll just bank on you preferring to pay for the license. They may not go after the mom and pops, but they'll hit every Fortune 1000 (and probably whether they use MongoDB or not).
- DeathArrow 5y ago
  SSPL license is intended to stop cloud providers to offer it as a service. People will have to use MongoDB Inc.'s Atlas for that.
  - threeseed 5y ago
    Or you can implement the MongoDB API like AWS did with DocumentDB. SSPL license is more intended to stop the less sophisticated hosting providers.
    - VWWHFSfQ 5y ago
      Isn't that just MongoDB frozen in time before it was re-licensed under SSPL? Or is it actually a completely new query/storage engine that is MongoDB client-compatible? In any case, I don't really like any of Amazon's homemade databases after the disaster that SimpleDB turned out to be.
      - plorkyeran 5y ago
        DocumentDB an entirely separate implementation built on Amazon's internal tech which just speaks the MongoDB wire protocol. If they use any pre-SSPL MongoDB code it's just incidental bits and pieces.
        spmurrayzzz 5y ago
        Side note: From my experiences with documentdb, during the fires I had to put out trying to migrate a large mongodb workload to it, it looks like its Postgres or Aurora-Postgres under the hood (based solely on duck-typing around features, identifier constraints, storage limitations, billing, etc)
- zokier 5y ago
  The wording in sspl is awkward in its vagueness of its scope, specifically this clause: > “Service Source Code” means the Corresponding Source for the Program or the modified version, and the Corresponding Source for all programs that you use to make the Program or modified version available as a service, including, without limitation, management software, user interfaces, application program interfaces, automation software, monitoring software, backup software, storage software and hosting software, all such that a user could run an instance of the service using the Service Source Code you make available For example providing SSPL software running on AWS as a service is probably/possibly license infriging because you are not able to provide source code for all the stuff you are using. In practice probably even the most well-intentioned service provider can easily be trapped by that clause.
  - jrochkind1 5y ago
    For instance, does it mean you can only run on an open source OS if you are providing it as a service, for instance? I guess not...? Personally, as an open source user, I want to be able to pay whomever I want to host a product I'm using. The SPPL seems intended to prevent this. Like it's intended to prevent cloud providers from offering it as a serivce, if it didn't do so successfully under the exact terms, they'd change the terms to do so, because that's the goal. Whereas in fact as a user, I want the freedom to pay whomever I want to host it for me, if it can effectively only be self-hosted (whatever that means!) or hosted by officially licensed vendors, that's not what I'm looking for in open source, I don't want hosting-provider lock-in. So, while we could legalistically look at the exact terms, I'd rather just have a license that is not designed to discourage/limit/prevent one of the things I want to do with the software, which is of course why we choose open source in the first place.
    - rmbyrro 5y ago
      You can still host mongoDB anywhere you'd like and manage it yourself. What they would like to prevent was AWS and the like offering "MongoDB as a Service", because that's how they make money and fund development of the product. If you enjoy freedom in open source and avoid lock-in, you will probably be hosting Mongo on an EC2 instance, for example. SSPL provisions don't apply to that.
- api 5y ago
  It doesn't make open source function as free labor for billion dollar companies. Look at the top contributors to OSI and look up that time a Facebook lawyer badmouthed anything but the most liberal licenses at FOSDEM.
- PeterZaitsev 5y ago
  My take is simple - DBaaS is the leading way databases are going to be confused in the future and SSPL ensures MongoDB is akin Proprietary Databases in this deployment mode - same as with Oracle while other cloud vendors can offer MongoDB they have to do it under the thumb of MongoDB Inc Open Source is on other hand ensures you have choice of vendors
christkv 5y ago
I think it’s quite amusing being an ex mongo engineer that the wire protocol and query language is kind of becoming a de facto industry standard with several major products emulating it and now ferret db.
- PeterZaitsev 5y ago
  Yep. Well is not this how many standards are gone ? I think MongoDB did a great job figuring out developer experience for Document Database
rapnie 5y ago
See also this discussion when FerretDB was still called MangoDB: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29071623 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29071623
- Narretz 5y ago
  That was a good name, but too close to MongoDB. FerretDB does seem to follow the rule that databases need to have terrible names.
  - codetrotter 5y ago
    MongoDB is an even more terrible name in my country. I know they named it that because it’s humongous but in my country, “mongo” is a derogatory term that is equally offensive as calling someone a retard and is derived from the word “mongolid”. I remember when I grew up we used to call each other mongo as a joke and not meaning anything bad about it, but then on one occasion a teacher overheard us and told us that she was sad to hear people use the word that way because she had a grandchild with Down’s syndrome. I think this was one of the first times I learned that words said to one person can be hurtful to someone else even if they were not the person you said it to. And after that I’ve tried to be more conscious about which words I use in public.
    - chrisseaton 5y ago
      Right - ‘mongo’ or ‘mong’ is both ableist and racist at the same time!
      - hnbad 5y ago
        I'm always taken aback when I hear Americans casually call each other "spaz" (or use it as a verb, often literally meaning "twitchy"). I'm not sure if it derives from "spastic" or just shares its etymology but my non-native brain always reads it as "Spast" or "Spasti", which is a fairly blatant ableist slur in my native language referring to cerebral palsy.
hkt 5y ago
This has been attempted before: https://github.com/torodb/server https://github.com/torodb/server I emailed the project authors a while back and they said that unfortunately it had been abandoned. A shame. I hope the FerretDB people can pull it off.
- ahachete 5y ago
  ToroDB founder here. Thank you for mentioning this. Unfortunately, yes, ToroDB is no longer being developed. I still believe it's a fantastic idea, and provides significant value. But when it was being built, 5 years ago, the NoSQL (as in "abandon SQL") state of mind was too strong, and the value proposition was not well understood. I moved to work on what's always been my passion and preference: Postgres, Postgres, Postgres. For those interested, StackGres[1] is what's now my company's focus. Things may be different today with ToroDB. The technical foundations and ideas are still there. If there would be significant interest by entities that would like to contribute to its development, it could be considered. I wish good luck to FerretDB. The task ahead is not easy: MongoDB protocol is very simple, but the API is terribly complex and full of nuances. Getting up and running a simple PoC is very simple. Getting from there to a production quality state with notable compatibility is very hard. [1]: https://stackgres.io https://stackgres.io
  - peterfarkas 5y ago
    Thank you for the wishes (FerretDB co-founder here), and also for your guidance before we started off on the project. We understand it is not easy, but it needs to be done, so we are dead set on delivering on this.
    - ahachete 5y ago
      Yes, good luck! :)
  - spmurrayzzz 5y ago
    The last point you made was exactly the problem when I attempted an experiment to migrate a heavy-IO MongoDB workload to DocumentDB - the latter imploded like a dying star after flipping the switch (under the hood it seems to be running a postgres/aurora-like storage layer). Implementation details matter, wiredtiger being one of the largest details.
toshk 5y ago
I always find it very brave those who decide to use a newly created database in their projects.
- charcircuit 5y ago
  PostgreSQL isn't a "newly created database"
  - funnyflamigo 5y ago
    > FerretDB is an open-source proxy, converting the MongoDB wire protocol queries to SQL - using PostgreSQL as a database engine. Based on this description I'd agree that FerretDB isn't a database itself. However the conversion between the MongoDB wire protocol to SQL queries could have bugs, data resiliency could be an issue if you need to guarantee writes, No guarantees of on-going support, etc. New db's are always welcome but to use a brand new one in production would be very.... bold.
- cpursley 5y ago
  I typically agree but this is based on Postgres which is nearly always a solid bet. Postgres jsonb works well enough for me - but this looks like a good alternative for Mongo people.
  - tgv 5y ago
    It's of course the translation that can contain bugs. Dumb error in a date conversion? Your accounting no longer works.
    - christkv 5y ago
      That and significant differences in performance for more complex operations like the aggregation framework
      - tgv 5y ago
        Curious about that. I recently made something similar, but for SQLite w/JSON. The backend can use a local sqlite3 file instead of mongodb, while using the same queries. It can only translate the queries we actually use, but it's quite doable to translate $lookup, $group and $project to their SQL equivalents (which were the inspiration for the aggregation in the first place, IIRC). Initial evaluation shows that the performance is quite good, and the translations look decent, so it might be possible to get some mileage out of ferretdb.
est 5y ago
Elasticsearch is the general purpose JSON store that really scales.
- speedgoose 5y ago
  With no write guarantees the last time I checked.
- threeseed 5y ago
  Right up until it falls over in a huge mess because Elasticsearch was never designed or intended to be used as a general purpose JSON store. It's a search engine. Or to quote Kyle from the Jepsen tests, "I would not use this as a system of record".
- AtNightWeCode 5y ago
  I would advise against storing data in ES. But it is a nice store for read models among other things.
  - remram 5y ago
    Why is that?
thisiswarry 5y ago
It doesn't seems to support HTTP protocol. So instead of an 60+MB MongoDB binary, you need Postgres (that's 3 times that size), plus FerretDB, plus a backend. 3 instances to run instead of one, that's a huge trade off.
- Aeolun 5y ago
  True, but you also get PostgreSQL instead of Mongo, which is easily worth another 120mb. I’m not sure what you mean by backend though? You need that regardless right?
  - thisiswarry 5y ago
    I'm front-end, so no. not really. just a few lambda here and there when the authorizations are too complex. not building big apps though
    - Aeolun 5y ago
      Can’t go directly from frontend to mongo? Unless you want to publically expose your instance.
soorajsanker 5y ago
postgres + postgres_setup + farretDB = something like MongoDB ? Could you add more details on "Why someone need to choose this over other DBs"from a product PoV or even the DX pov?
chespinoza 5y ago
Interesting, but why not just use vanilla Postgresql? JSON support is awesome now.
- PeterZaitsev 5y ago
  JSON support in PostgrSQL is indeed extremely powerful however it is not as simple. MongoDB provides "native" document persistence for programming languages, where with PostgreSQL JSON you have to live in relational database SQL land
- CodesInChaos 5y ago
  1. Postgres's json is limited to standard json. MongoDB supports additional scalar types, like blobs and dates. 2. MongoDB's drivers are designed to handle documents. If you use postgres directly, you have to build that part yourself (effectively a kind of ORM, including a query builder)
redwood 5y ago
Is Amazon involved or funding? Saw https://www.percona.com/solutions/build/cloud-database-services/aws#:~:text=Percona%20is%20an%20AWS%20Consulting,within%20Amazon%20RDS%20or%20EC2 https://www.percona.com/solutions/build/cloud-database-servi.... and https://partners.amazonaws.com/partners/001E000000eh7tyIAA/Percona https://partners.amazonaws.com/partners/001E000000eh7tyIAA/P...
- PeterZaitsev 5y ago
  FerretDB is not Percona's Project through me (Peter Zaitsev) is involved in both companies, CEO at Percona and Board Member/Advisor at FerretDB AWS is not funding FerretDB either
tharne 5y ago
Coming soon: AWS Ferret, a fully managed AWS alternative to FerretDB;
- PeterZaitsev 5y ago
  Frankly, I hoped for years for things to be other way around with AWS to take DocumentDB Open Source and keep hosted version on steroids powered by Aurora PostgreSQL. Having said that I think there is a lot of value in FerretDB for Cloud vendors which will be able to use this project to offer MongoDB Compatible DBaaS experience
hardwaresofton 5y ago
Is there a suite of conformance tests and/or benchmarks for MongoDB? A blackbox test suite that tests common query types and could be run against mongo itself (similar to pgbench, TPC-C, etc) and can optionally test for correctness/speed would go a long way towards making it easier to trust this project with workloads.
- jd_mongodb 5y ago
  The MongoDB test suite used to test compatibility is here: https://github.com/mongodb-developer/service-tests https://github.com/mongodb-developer/service-tests
  - hardwaresofton 5y ago
    Thanks for the pointer, couldn’t find this myself!
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- PeterZaitsev 5y ago
  This is early stage project so you're unlikely to be able to run any real MongoDB applications with it yet. Benchmarks are too to come 100% Compatibility is not really a focus, real application use cases is. You can read on FerretDB's CEO take on compatibility here https://www.ferretdb.io/2021/12/07/mongodb-compatibility-what-s-really-important/ https://www.ferretdb.io/2021/12/07/mongodb-compatibility-wha...
  - rmbyrro 5y ago
    How is it a drop-in replacement if 100% compatibility isn't a focus?
    - aleksi 5y ago
      The linked blog post tried to explain it the best we could.
CodesInChaos 5y ago
How does FerretDB represent documents in Postgres? JSONB, or something custom? How does it handle the mismatch between jsonb and bson? In particular: * more scalar types, including blobs. One hack I could think of is using ISO 8859-1 encoding instead of UTF-8, which can act as a pseudo-blob. * preserved field order
- PeterZaitsev 5y ago
  FerretDB is very early in its development phase so things can change. Right now it uses JSONB but enhances object with additional meta data, such as field order for example.
- aleksi 5y ago
  FerretDB co-founder there. The order of fields is maintained by adding a special field with keys in the original order. For example, `{z: 1, a: {y:2, x:3}}` is stored as `{"a":{"x":3,"y":2,"$k":["y","x"]},"z":1,"$k":["z","a"]}`. Additional types are stored as objects with special fields too. For example, binary values are stored as `{"$b": "<base 64 string>", "s": <subtype number>}`. The full mapping is there: https://github.com/FerretDB/FerretDB/blob/b7e8240607e043a85816481b1a73730fda0780e6/internal/bson/bsontype.go#L17-L32 https://github.com/FerretDB/FerretDB/blob/b7e8240607e043a858...
mdellavo 5y ago
It seems to be to be a misrepresentation to call this a mongodb alternative.
- PeterZaitsev 5y ago
  Why ? The Goal of the project is instead of MongoDB you use FerretDB + PostgreSQL (available as packaged solution)
leros 5y ago
I'd be really curious to see if you can use the underlying Postgres to do effective relational queries. This could be an interesting solution for migrating a mongo database to a Postgres database. Or at least having more relational queries for certain things.

136 points by kiyanwang 5y ago

kellengreen 5y ago

Perhaps I'm just being naive, bug I still fail to understand the animosity towards the SSPL license.

hkt 5y ago
My issue is more with the software than the license - I'm comfortable running postgres at scale, less so mongodb. This will be great for people like me and widen the range of software that I can use off the shelf.
- stingraycharles 5y ago
  I don’t understand, your problem isn’t with the license but the software, but you don’t explain why you prefer FerretDB’s software? Is it more reliable than MongoDB?
2Gkashmiri 5y ago
correct me if i am wrong but imo sspl is a superset of AGPL, because i have read somewhere that agpl fails if kept behind an api. you don't need to publish source and all that. the problem with non-sspl licenses is, lets say with bsd, that you give the downstream developer the right to decide if your work is part of software which gives source to users when the concern of "Free software" is that end users MUST be given source. when it comes to cloud providers, even if this agpl license is true, google already bans AGPL software but not aws but i'm not sure but that means they dictate to the end user with vendor lock-in and stuff. anyways SSPL aims to accomodate even this loophole by making sure if you are a provider, you have to provide source code to ALL software you use. this means, for an end user you can't be forced into a small free software carrot but still subject to rest of closed source. i'd say this is a win-win for end users, intermediaries and developers don't matter when it comes to freedoms of end users
- yessirwhatever 5y ago
  In the words of Matthew Garrett "There are many AGPL projects where you literally can't pay someone money to avoid the AGPL. There are zero SSPL projects in the same position." https://twitter.com/mjg59/status/1354698533094318082 https://twitter.com/mjg59/status/1354698533094318082
  - teddyh 5y ago
    I would assume that this is a good thing.
- remram 5y ago
  "All rights reserved" is a subset of AGPL. We're just not sure how far from AGPL the SSPL actually fall, because it is worded ambiguously. In practice the original claimed aim of the license does not matter that much. Thankfully there are other licenses similar to AGPL, like BSL.
pydry 5y ago
FAANG are pretty explicit about hating AGPL and SSPL coz they kind of target them. That leads to a lot of second order animosity.
- threeseed 5y ago
  It makes no sense to use FAANG in this context. It's the cloud providers that are the target of the license, specifically AWS.
  - junon 5y ago
    One of the "A"s in "FAANG" is the same "A" in "AWS", so it does indeed make some sense.
    - Sosh101 5y ago
      And Google (GCP).
      - jaywalk 5y ago
        But not Microsoft, to which Google is a distant third place as far as the cloud goes.
  - philote 5y ago
    Plus, isn't it MAANA now? (Meta and Alphabet)
strken 5y ago
I'm wary of it because "make the functionality of the Program or a modified version available to third parties as a service" is vague. If I have a web app that persists data in MongoDB and lets users query it in a complicated way[0], but doesn't provide an outright MongoDB-as-a-service implementation, it's still arguably making its functionality available. I don't trust them to enforce the edge cases fairly. [0] For example, a custom report builder for an inventory management system, or a query builder for a CRM
- pydry 5y ago
  This sounds like the least arguable edge case possible even if they were interested in chasing it (which they wouldnt be).
  - d3nj4l 5y ago
    Although I admit that it's unlikely they will sue you for a product that isn't just a database, you shouldn't build your product on the (perceived) goodwill of the MongoDB developers.
    - erezsh 5y ago
      Meanwhile, half the world start-ups base their entire tech stack on the goodwill of amazon and google, not to pull the rug from under them in hundreds of legal ways.
      - jaywalk 5y ago
        Using your definition of "goodwill" means basically everything on the Internet is based on the goodwill of some other entity. I think that paying for a service pretty clearly moves it out of the "goodwill" category.
  - salmo 5y ago
    They wouldn't be... until they go under. Then the vultures will be happy to shake folks down to pay for the licensed version or a law suit. Merit doesn't really matter, they have a claim and fighting it will cost you. They'll just bank on you preferring to pay for the license. They may not go after the mom and pops, but they'll hit every Fortune 1000 (and probably whether they use MongoDB or not).
DeathArrow 5y ago
SSPL license is intended to stop cloud providers to offer it as a service. People will have to use MongoDB Inc.'s Atlas for that.
- threeseed 5y ago
  Or you can implement the MongoDB API like AWS did with DocumentDB. SSPL license is more intended to stop the less sophisticated hosting providers.
  - VWWHFSfQ 5y ago
    Isn't that just MongoDB frozen in time before it was re-licensed under SSPL? Or is it actually a completely new query/storage engine that is MongoDB client-compatible? In any case, I don't really like any of Amazon's homemade databases after the disaster that SimpleDB turned out to be.
    - plorkyeran 5y ago
      DocumentDB an entirely separate implementation built on Amazon's internal tech which just speaks the MongoDB wire protocol. If they use any pre-SSPL MongoDB code it's just incidental bits and pieces.
      - spmurrayzzz 5y ago
        Side note: From my experiences with documentdb, during the fires I had to put out trying to migrate a large mongodb workload to it, it looks like its Postgres or Aurora-Postgres under the hood (based solely on duck-typing around features, identifier constraints, storage limitations, billing, etc)
zokier 5y ago
The wording in sspl is awkward in its vagueness of its scope, specifically this clause: > “Service Source Code” means the Corresponding Source for the Program or the modified version, and the Corresponding Source for all programs that you use to make the Program or modified version available as a service, including, without limitation, management software, user interfaces, application program interfaces, automation software, monitoring software, backup software, storage software and hosting software, all such that a user could run an instance of the service using the Service Source Code you make available For example providing SSPL software running on AWS as a service is probably/possibly license infriging because you are not able to provide source code for all the stuff you are using. In practice probably even the most well-intentioned service provider can easily be trapped by that clause.
- jrochkind1 5y ago
  For instance, does it mean you can only run on an open source OS if you are providing it as a service, for instance? I guess not...? Personally, as an open source user, I want to be able to pay whomever I want to host a product I'm using. The SPPL seems intended to prevent this. Like it's intended to prevent cloud providers from offering it as a serivce, if it didn't do so successfully under the exact terms, they'd change the terms to do so, because that's the goal. Whereas in fact as a user, I want the freedom to pay whomever I want to host it for me, if it can effectively only be self-hosted (whatever that means!) or hosted by officially licensed vendors, that's not what I'm looking for in open source, I don't want hosting-provider lock-in. So, while we could legalistically look at the exact terms, I'd rather just have a license that is not designed to discourage/limit/prevent one of the things I want to do with the software, which is of course why we choose open source in the first place.
  - rmbyrro 5y ago
    You can still host mongoDB anywhere you'd like and manage it yourself. What they would like to prevent was AWS and the like offering "MongoDB as a Service", because that's how they make money and fund development of the product. If you enjoy freedom in open source and avoid lock-in, you will probably be hosting Mongo on an EC2 instance, for example. SSPL provisions don't apply to that.
api 5y ago
It doesn't make open source function as free labor for billion dollar companies. Look at the top contributors to OSI and look up that time a Facebook lawyer badmouthed anything but the most liberal licenses at FOSDEM.
PeterZaitsev 5y ago
My take is simple - DBaaS is the leading way databases are going to be confused in the future and SSPL ensures MongoDB is akin Proprietary Databases in this deployment mode - same as with Oracle while other cloud vendors can offer MongoDB they have to do it under the thumb of MongoDB Inc Open Source is on other hand ensures you have choice of vendors

christkv 5y ago

I think it’s quite amusing being an ex mongo engineer that the wire protocol and query language is kind of becoming a de facto industry standard with several major products emulating it and now ferret db.

PeterZaitsev 5y ago
Yep. Well is not this how many standards are gone ? I think MongoDB did a great job figuring out developer experience for Document Database

rapnie 5y ago

See also this discussion when FerretDB was still called MangoDB: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29071623 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29071623

Narretz 5y ago
That was a good name, but too close to MongoDB. FerretDB does seem to follow the rule that databases need to have terrible names.
- codetrotter 5y ago
  MongoDB is an even more terrible name in my country. I know they named it that because it’s humongous but in my country, “mongo” is a derogatory term that is equally offensive as calling someone a retard and is derived from the word “mongolid”. I remember when I grew up we used to call each other mongo as a joke and not meaning anything bad about it, but then on one occasion a teacher overheard us and told us that she was sad to hear people use the word that way because she had a grandchild with Down’s syndrome. I think this was one of the first times I learned that words said to one person can be hurtful to someone else even if they were not the person you said it to. And after that I’ve tried to be more conscious about which words I use in public.
  - chrisseaton 5y ago
    Right - ‘mongo’ or ‘mong’ is both ableist and racist at the same time!
    - hnbad 5y ago
      I'm always taken aback when I hear Americans casually call each other "spaz" (or use it as a verb, often literally meaning "twitchy"). I'm not sure if it derives from "spastic" or just shares its etymology but my non-native brain always reads it as "Spast" or "Spasti", which is a fairly blatant ableist slur in my native language referring to cerebral palsy.

hkt 5y ago

This has been attempted before: https://github.com/torodb/server https://github.com/torodb/server I emailed the project authors a while back and they said that unfortunately it had been abandoned. A shame. I hope the FerretDB people can pull it off.

ahachete 5y ago
ToroDB founder here. Thank you for mentioning this. Unfortunately, yes, ToroDB is no longer being developed. I still believe it's a fantastic idea, and provides significant value. But when it was being built, 5 years ago, the NoSQL (as in "abandon SQL") state of mind was too strong, and the value proposition was not well understood. I moved to work on what's always been my passion and preference: Postgres, Postgres, Postgres. For those interested, StackGres[1] is what's now my company's focus. Things may be different today with ToroDB. The technical foundations and ideas are still there. If there would be significant interest by entities that would like to contribute to its development, it could be considered. I wish good luck to FerretDB. The task ahead is not easy: MongoDB protocol is very simple, but the API is terribly complex and full of nuances. Getting up and running a simple PoC is very simple. Getting from there to a production quality state with notable compatibility is very hard. [1]: https://stackgres.io https://stackgres.io
- peterfarkas 5y ago
  Thank you for the wishes (FerretDB co-founder here), and also for your guidance before we started off on the project. We understand it is not easy, but it needs to be done, so we are dead set on delivering on this.
  - ahachete 5y ago
    Yes, good luck! :)
- spmurrayzzz 5y ago
  The last point you made was exactly the problem when I attempted an experiment to migrate a heavy-IO MongoDB workload to DocumentDB - the latter imploded like a dying star after flipping the switch (under the hood it seems to be running a postgres/aurora-like storage layer). Implementation details matter, wiredtiger being one of the largest details.

toshk 5y ago

I always find it very brave those who decide to use a newly created database in their projects.

charcircuit 5y ago
PostgreSQL isn't a "newly created database"
- funnyflamigo 5y ago
  > FerretDB is an open-source proxy, converting the MongoDB wire protocol queries to SQL - using PostgreSQL as a database engine. Based on this description I'd agree that FerretDB isn't a database itself. However the conversion between the MongoDB wire protocol to SQL queries could have bugs, data resiliency could be an issue if you need to guarantee writes, No guarantees of on-going support, etc. New db's are always welcome but to use a brand new one in production would be very.... bold.
cpursley 5y ago
I typically agree but this is based on Postgres which is nearly always a solid bet. Postgres jsonb works well enough for me - but this looks like a good alternative for Mongo people.
- tgv 5y ago
  It's of course the translation that can contain bugs. Dumb error in a date conversion? Your accounting no longer works.
  - christkv 5y ago
    That and significant differences in performance for more complex operations like the aggregation framework
    - tgv 5y ago
      Curious about that. I recently made something similar, but for SQLite w/JSON. The backend can use a local sqlite3 file instead of mongodb, while using the same queries. It can only translate the queries we actually use, but it's quite doable to translate $lookup, $group and $project to their SQL equivalents (which were the inspiration for the aggregation in the first place, IIRC). Initial evaluation shows that the performance is quite good, and the translations look decent, so it might be possible to get some mileage out of ferretdb.

est 5y ago

Elasticsearch is the general purpose JSON store that really scales.

speedgoose 5y ago
With no write guarantees the last time I checked.
threeseed 5y ago
Right up until it falls over in a huge mess because Elasticsearch was never designed or intended to be used as a general purpose JSON store. It's a search engine. Or to quote Kyle from the Jepsen tests, "I would not use this as a system of record".
AtNightWeCode 5y ago
I would advise against storing data in ES. But it is a nice store for read models among other things.
- remram 5y ago
  Why is that?

thisiswarry 5y ago

It doesn't seems to support HTTP protocol. So instead of an 60+MB MongoDB binary, you need Postgres (that's 3 times that size), plus FerretDB, plus a backend. 3 instances to run instead of one, that's a huge trade off.

Aeolun 5y ago
True, but you also get PostgreSQL instead of Mongo, which is easily worth another 120mb. I’m not sure what you mean by backend though? You need that regardless right?
- thisiswarry 5y ago
  I'm front-end, so no. not really. just a few lambda here and there when the authorizations are too complex. not building big apps though
  - Aeolun 5y ago
    Can’t go directly from frontend to mongo? Unless you want to publically expose your instance.

soorajsanker 5y ago

postgres + postgres_setup + farretDB = something like MongoDB ? Could you add more details on "Why someone need to choose this over other DBs"from a product PoV or even the DX pov?

chespinoza 5y ago

Interesting, but why not just use vanilla Postgresql? JSON support is awesome now.

PeterZaitsev 5y ago
JSON support in PostgrSQL is indeed extremely powerful however it is not as simple. MongoDB provides "native" document persistence for programming languages, where with PostgreSQL JSON you have to live in relational database SQL land
CodesInChaos 5y ago
1. Postgres's json is limited to standard json. MongoDB supports additional scalar types, like blobs and dates. 2. MongoDB's drivers are designed to handle documents. If you use postgres directly, you have to build that part yourself (effectively a kind of ORM, including a query builder)

redwood 5y ago

Is Amazon involved or funding? Saw https://www.percona.com/solutions/build/cloud-database-services/aws#:~:text=Percona%20is%20an%20AWS%20Consulting,within%20Amazon%20RDS%20or%20EC2 https://www.percona.com/solutions/build/cloud-database-servi.... and https://partners.amazonaws.com/partners/001E000000eh7tyIAA/Percona https://partners.amazonaws.com/partners/001E000000eh7tyIAA/P...

PeterZaitsev 5y ago
FerretDB is not Percona's Project through me (Peter Zaitsev) is involved in both companies, CEO at Percona and Board Member/Advisor at FerretDB AWS is not funding FerretDB either

tharne 5y ago

Coming soon: AWS Ferret, a fully managed AWS alternative to FerretDB;

PeterZaitsev 5y ago
Frankly, I hoped for years for things to be other way around with AWS to take DocumentDB Open Source and keep hosted version on steroids powered by Aurora PostgreSQL. Having said that I think there is a lot of value in FerretDB for Cloud vendors which will be able to use this project to offer MongoDB Compatible DBaaS experience

hardwaresofton 5y ago

Is there a suite of conformance tests and/or benchmarks for MongoDB? A blackbox test suite that tests common query types and could be run against mongo itself (similar to pgbench, TPC-C, etc) and can optionally test for correctness/speed would go a long way towards making it easier to trust this project with workloads.

jd_mongodb 5y ago
The MongoDB test suite used to test compatibility is here: https://github.com/mongodb-developer/service-tests https://github.com/mongodb-developer/service-tests
- hardwaresofton 5y ago
  Thanks for the pointer, couldn’t find this myself!
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
PeterZaitsev 5y ago
This is early stage project so you're unlikely to be able to run any real MongoDB applications with it yet. Benchmarks are too to come 100% Compatibility is not really a focus, real application use cases is. You can read on FerretDB's CEO take on compatibility here https://www.ferretdb.io/2021/12/07/mongodb-compatibility-what-s-really-important/ https://www.ferretdb.io/2021/12/07/mongodb-compatibility-wha...
- rmbyrro 5y ago
  How is it a drop-in replacement if 100% compatibility isn't a focus?
  - aleksi 5y ago
    The linked blog post tried to explain it the best we could.

CodesInChaos 5y ago

How does FerretDB represent documents in Postgres? JSONB, or something custom? How does it handle the mismatch between jsonb and bson? In particular: * more scalar types, including blobs. One hack I could think of is using ISO 8859-1 encoding instead of UTF-8, which can act as a pseudo-blob. * preserved field order

PeterZaitsev 5y ago
FerretDB is very early in its development phase so things can change. Right now it uses JSONB but enhances object with additional meta data, such as field order for example.
aleksi 5y ago
FerretDB co-founder there. The order of fields is maintained by adding a special field with keys in the original order. For example, `{z: 1, a: {y:2, x:3}}` is stored as `{"a":{"x":3,"y":2,"$k":["y","x"]},"z":1,"$k":["z","a"]}`. Additional types are stored as objects with special fields too. For example, binary values are stored as `{"$b": "<base 64 string>", "s": <subtype number>}`. The full mapping is there: https://github.com/FerretDB/FerretDB/blob/b7e8240607e043a85816481b1a73730fda0780e6/internal/bson/bsontype.go#L17-L32 https://github.com/FerretDB/FerretDB/blob/b7e8240607e043a858...

mdellavo 5y ago

It seems to be to be a misrepresentation to call this a mongodb alternative.

PeterZaitsev 5y ago
Why ? The Goal of the project is instead of MongoDB you use FerretDB + PostgreSQL (available as packaged solution)

leros 5y ago

I'd be really curious to see if you can use the underlying Postgres to do effective relational queries. This could be an interesting solution for migrating a mongo database to a Postgres database. Or at least having more relational queries for certain things.