111–120 of 323 posts
Finally an AWS service where the name makes sense and describes what it is. I hope this is the start of a trend.
How the heck was this approved by legal? AWS is linking to MongoDB's own documentation. https://docs.aws.amazon.com/documentdb/latest/developerguide... Go to any operation, it links to docs.mongodb.com !
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I love Azure for this. The names are almost all extremely straightforward. There are a handful that have made the jump from confusing to straight forward, and a handful that have made the jump from straightforward to confusing (CosmosDB, formerly DocumentDB, chiefly comes to mind).
Except for the fact that Azure names seem to change once per year. Our Azure SA was giving us a presentation and actually got confused himself. "So that's TFS... I mean VSTS... Actually wait, it's Azure DevOps now?"
Earlier quoted context omitted.
MongoDB still have a strong hand - control of the client and particularly its exposed featureset - due to that, also control of the protocol and the ability to, for example, insert legally protected strings in the style of the Apple SMC signature into the handshake. - ability to gate new features on the presence of an object like a copyrighted text, trademark, or even a crypto signature - ownership of the name. AWS a…
The client change would never work. The client is licensed as lgpl, so if they tried to pull any funny business like that, it would be instantly forked and if’d out.
Jeff Bezos continues his quest to eat all open lunch boxes.
I was reading a post [0] by Brian Cantrill that predicted this would be the result of licences like the SSPL. I instinctively disagreed with him, but it turns out he was right: "The cloud services providers are currently reproprietarizing all of computing — they are making their own CPUs for crying out loud! — reimplementing the bits of your software that they need in the name of the service that their customers want…
What is the way out? Would love to hear from people.
I hope MongoDB's users are really keen on on-prem otherwise this might be a challenging moment for them.
Not sure what this means. MongoDB has had Atlas which is a cloud hosted solution for a while now.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Besides that AWS will charge per transaction (at 0.2 per million) outrageous given that you already pay per instance. Correct pricing strategy needs to be per request or per instance, AWS is charging for both
The correct pricing strategy of any product is "whatever the customer is willing to pay for it". If you feel the price is too steep for your use-case, then don't buy it.
My bet is that it is built on top of Aurora PostgreSQL. By looking at the "Limits" section ( https://docs.aws.amazon.com/documentdb/latest/developerguide... ), identifiers are limited to 63 characters and the same characters that PostgreSQL limits identifiers to; and a collection size limit of 32TB, coincidentally maximum PostgreSQL table size. Edit: I can confirm: does not allow the UTF-8 null character in strings:…