Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's rarely actually true for anyone that wants to operate for more than a short time period. There are significant costs to gouging your customers. Anything from it being illegal, to it encouraging competition and your customers being motivated to actively flee you and shit on your reputation. The correct pricing strategy for people that don't have a long term enforceable monopoly is "whatever most customers are w…
I think you've hit on what always bothers me about this sentiment. It is obvious that at any point in time you can charge the maximum customers are willing to pay, but that allows for disruption through the channels like competition. The opposite where you charge the minimum to continue providing the goods or services seems optimal, though, leads to a company with zero profits that is unattractive to investment. Is t…
Amazon DocumentDB, with MongoDB compatibility
141–150 of 323 posts
Re: Amazon DocumentDB, with MongoDB compatibility
#142Earlier quoted context omitted.
We were paying $5k a month for Atlas. So while it's not 'cheap' for a hosted solution it's cheaper. And the autoscale and RR is better DR is super configurable. And then there is this line. 'Together with optimizations like advanced query processing, connection pooling, and optimized recovery and rebuild, Amazon DocumentDB achieves twice the throughput of currently available MongoDB managed services.`
Can you please elaborate? This was launched today, you had access to the new feature in advance?
Re: Amazon DocumentDB, with MongoDB compatibility
#143Re: Amazon DocumentDB, with MongoDB compatibility
#144Earlier quoted context omitted.
What is the way out? Would love to hear from people.
There's no secret formula to stop people from competing with you. If MongoDB Inc is successful, it should be because they run a good document-database-as-a-service people want to use, not because they earn indefinite seigniorage from launching a popular open source project.
Re: Amazon DocumentDB, with MongoDB compatibility
#145I'm pretty sure this is going to kill Mongo as a company dead. With this in existence there's literally no reason to use Atlas. If they wanted to twist the knife they should get to work implementing a pass through migration option.
Have you heard of Amazon Elasticsearch Service, launched in 2015? Elastic is doing fine.
But I can't help but think Amazon can and would easily fix those things if they mattered. Amazon's hosted Elasticsearch is a lot cheaper than Elastic's, and I'll bet that's enough to get people to use it.
Re: Amazon DocumentDB, with MongoDB compatibility
#146Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
As the person suggesting it, it's difficult to imagine how it could never work considering I haven't managed to figure out all the possible combinations in which such a strategy could be applied. Finally, it is quite exasperating to call this kind of strategy "funny business" in a thread about their core tech being ripped off by a megacorp
Re: Amazon DocumentDB, with MongoDB compatibility
#147I get it, I love Aws, just wish this was priced differently.
Re: Amazon DocumentDB, with MongoDB compatibility
#148Earlier quoted context omitted.
What is the way out? Would love to hear from people.
Ultimately, Cantrill put it well: > ...for those open source companies that still harbor magical beliefs, let me put this to you as directly as possible: cloud services providers are emphatically not going to license your proprietary software. I mean, you knew that, right? MongoDB Inc cannot make Amazon pay commercial license fees. That is not a thing that will happen. They have a lever in front of them with two posi…
Re: Amazon DocumentDB, with MongoDB compatibility
#149If I'm reading the pricing page correctly, DocumentDB would run a _minimum_ of $200/month. That's for the smallest instance and no storage or I/O. Kind of steep if you ask me.
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 key point is illustrated by this quote from their main landing page: "storage and compute are decoupled, allowing each to scale independently".
This suggests it is built on top of the Aurora storage layer, or something similar, as other comments have suggested. This means there is a real cost per I/O operation because you aren't limited by the physical hardware of the compute instances, you get "free" storage nodes underneath that do much more than traditional storage and thus have to be built into the pricing structure.
It is definitely not going to be the cheapest possible solution for all use cases, but do the math before you reject it. If it does follow the Aurora pattern, then the number of I/O operations you are billed for will be a lot less than you may think because, to use another quote from their product page, "Amazon DocumentDB reduces database I/O by writing only database changes to the storage layer, avoiding slow, inefficient, and expensive data replication across network links". I think that quote is harder to understand without background as it sounds like market speak, but lines up very well with some of their in depth Aurora whitepapers, such as https://www.allthingsdistributed.com/files/p1041-verbitski.p... Again, I haven't seen evidence this is based on Aurora but the details they talk about line up really well.
Re: Amazon DocumentDB, with MongoDB compatibility
#150Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ultimately, Cantrill put it well: > ...for those open source companies that still harbor magical beliefs, let me put this to you as directly as possible: cloud services providers are emphatically not going to license your proprietary software. I mean, you knew that, right? MongoDB Inc cannot make Amazon pay commercial license fees. That is not a thing that will happen. They have a lever in front of them with two posi…
Could Mongo or other companies use the Oracle v. Google precedent regarding API copyright to extract money from competitive vultures like Amazon?