Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

MongoDB shares jump more than 30% in $192M IPO

cnbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

351–360 of 425 posts

Re: MongoDB shares jump more than 30% in $192M IPO

#351

Post by cujic9 »

heisenbit wrote: post #83
cujic9 wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pricing is hard, but yes, I think they did price this one a little too low. That said, the goal is for shares to have a nice upward pop when they hit the open market. This helps encourage a broader based of shareholders, protecting against the case where a big shareholder decides to dump all of their shares. This also helps in the case where the company comes out with bad news in the near future. Shareholders who mak…

The ones who made money are the ones who sold and who are ex-shareholders.

And the underwriters, and the early shareholders who grabbed a little chunk of that 30% on the way up.

Re: MongoDB shares jump more than 30% in $192M IPO

#352

Post by quickben »

developer2 wrote: post #345
blitmap wrote: post #298

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure HN celebrates products for simply being successfully marketed. That said, I do think they made a way of handling a data model pleasurable. Different paradigm++

>> not sure HN celebrates products for simply being successfully marketed Except that Mongo didn't find success through "simply being successfully marketed". So many people in this thread cannot seem to understand how to look at the business as a whole. Software devs are blasting the software for not being a mind-blowing piece of technology, while not understanding that it has its niche and - apparently - a good busi…

Have you looked at their financials? They are in the same bandwagon as their technology.

Re: MongoDB shares jump more than 30% in $192M IPO

#353

Post by userpass »

zzzcpan wrote: post #64
da_chicken wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

RDBMS makes sense for most applications. Most applications store data that can be fit to the relational model. Most applications aren't big data or data mining OLAP. Most RDBMSs can do key-value stores very well now. Most applications also care more about consistency over availability, which is what RDBMSs do (CAP theorem). Many NoSQL data stores choose availability and partitioning and sacrifice consistency (i.e., "…

You don't seem to know this, but no traditional RDBMSs actually provide CAP consistency, for that they would have to use at least two-phase commit or something, but they don't. So, they all are noCAP databases. Electronic health or financial records are way safer in a proper eventually consistent database, like orders of magnitude safer, but everyone just takes the risk with some insurance at best to cover the losses…

The C in the CAP theorem refers to strong consistency usually in the form of ACID transactions.

MongoDB gives up the C because not all applications need ACID transactions and only a weaker form of consistency called eventual consistency. In exchange it can do automatic failover without excessively slow distributed transactions, data corruption or data loss (at least in theory) and sharding.

On the other hand almost every RDBMS has ACID transactions.

Re: MongoDB shares jump more than 30% in $192M IPO

#354

Post by gerbilly »

Maybe machines are too fast today. Back in the 70s, even departmental computers were slow. This might have forced better engineering choices onto the product designers.

The difference between and O( n log n) algorithm and an O(n^2) one could have made the difference between a decent product and a totally unusable one.

Nowadays, toy examples can seem to work fine even when the products have really terrible implementations.

Re: MongoDB shares jump more than 30% in $192M IPO

#355

Post by awinder »

rburhum wrote: post #98
munk-a wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If they had done so by presenting a product that was picked up due to it's merit and continued to gain traction based on that then I'd be rather impressed. Instead the story of MongoDB seems to be how extremely well targeted marketing and sales can build a so-so product into a huge IPO, there have been performance comparisons showing it isn't even the best at what it does so this IPO is riding on the network effect o…

Most people forget that with startups, what you are trying to create is a business... the technology behind is only one element to it. It is extremely difficult to do good marketing and sales and they did it. Solve a customer problem while building a healthy business... a success story in my book.

I agree but given that the technology is the product here, they’re in a bit of a different situation. Evaluating the technology is evaluating the product here.

Re: MongoDB shares jump more than 30% in $192M IPO

#356

Post by qaq »

gaius wrote: post #329
qaq wrote: post #236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

what % of people have workload beyond something that PG on i3.16xlarge can handle?

I always think this when people talk about scaling. You can buy off the shelf now boxes with 48 or 96 cores, 1-2T of RAM, internal bays for 10s of T of SSD or connect it to an AFA and get 100s of T. This is not even an exotic custom build system, just a commodity, and has been for years. Running a recent version of a conventional database on a box like this goes a very, very long way, with very little hassle because…

You can have 224 cores and 12TB RAM in a commodity Supermicro box.

Re: MongoDB shares jump more than 30% in $192M IPO

#357

Post by KallDrexx »

qaq wrote: post #275
KallDrexx wrote: post #266

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's also about locality of your data. Having a global infrastructure means 150-200ms minimum latency per query if you have a system in India or Singapore with a database server in a US data center region. That adds up quick.

That is orthogonal concern to what is being discussed if you run geo distributed Mongo cluster you will either have slow queries or will compromise on data integrity.

It's not orthogonal because it is harder to have master-master cross data center setups in relational databases even in scenarios where eventual consistency is acceptable (such as a use case for a piece of our infrastructure we have).

Sure MongoDB may not be the best fit for it but my point is more that these are scenarios where horizontal scaling is an important consideration makes more sense for some nosql solutions than for sql solutions. It's not just about single box performance.

Re: MongoDB shares jump more than 30% in $192M IPO

#358

Post by noncoml »

mfjordvald wrote: post #312
noncoml wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

MongoDBs clients are much more simple to use than that of RethinkDB. Imho that was the number one reason it didn’t gain traction.

I'm curious what you mean by this. We use a combination of RethinkDB + Deepstream at work and it's amazing to work with with really simple querying language. I might very well be missing something, though, as I'm not the main developer so not too deep into it.

For one is the extra database handle and run I have to use every time, instead of the commands being methods to the db handle object. The repetition of males code more verbose.

Secondly, it’s the ReQL. It’s not native but not JSON based either. A weird hybrid mix.

But it’s only my personal opinion based on my taste.

Re: MongoDB shares jump more than 30% in $192M IPO

#359

Post by sigzero »

GenericsMotors wrote: post #349
takeda wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even minor things like picking a product name had impact. They also implemented most desirable features (the gotcha was that they were half assed, but if your evaluation was also half assed as is usually done you won't notice it) I actually chose it back in 2010 project and on paper MongoDB looked better than other databases. MongoDB name as they mentioned originates from Humongous Database giving false impression th…

> Even minor things like picking a product name had impact. They get zero points for this. It pretty much reads as "Retard"DB in Portuguese, Spanish, and IIRC German.

Not that it is 100% reliable but I put "mongo" in Google translate for all three of those languages and it comes out "mongo". Unless mongo is "slang" in those languages.

Re: MongoDB shares jump more than 30% in $192M IPO

#360

Post by throw98987 »

rdslw wrote: post #343
shubhamjain wrote: post #22

MongoDB isn't usually seen favorably but everyone must admit that it's an unlikely success story that deserves admiration. Think about it. Bringing a database to the market with a completely different paradigm, growing it to the enterprise-production-ready level, and creating a billion-dollar business around is no small deal. Yes, they did ride the NoSQL zeitgeist but they survived when others had no major success. U…

I don't buy "creating a billion-dollar business". Ive read a Bloomberg story on the IPO and saw there two hilarious sequences "MongoDB has 4,300 paying customers. MongoDB employs 820 people in 29 offices" - that does not compute (for me) so I started analyzing their financial report (btw funny is nobody in whole HN discussion quoted numbers from the report so far, but a lot of 'im buying their stock' talks here). In…

How can one short it efficiently?
Post reply on HN