Live data from Hacker News

Amazon DocumentDB, with MongoDB compatibility

aws.amazon.com

141–150 of 323 posts

Re: Amazon DocumentDB, with MongoDB compatibility

#141
post #140

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…

I'm not an economist, and can't point to to anything in particular, but I would be skeptical of anything that claimed a general approach to that. "Optimal" depends entirely on what you're optimizing for, which is basically an infinite possibility space. I could need a significant amount of revenue immediately to accomplish a desired business development, or I could have plenty of cash and want to build a large and loyal long term customer base at the cost of immediate profit. As you say, successful businesses exist doing pretty much everything. The only limiting factor is being a viable ongoing concern (and that can just mean having a rich backer). I'm sure there are things discussing optimizing based on small slices of the possibility space though (but all the normal caveats about economists making dumb assumptions that rarely apply to humans apply even to those).

Re: Amazon DocumentDB, with MongoDB compatibility

#142
post #40

Earlier 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?

As others have said we had MongoDB Atlas. And it is basically mongodb ran in aws with a pretty interface to do basic things like whitelist ips and another such functions.

Re: Amazon DocumentDB, with MongoDB compatibility

#144
post #79

Earlier 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.

But isn't it wrong to place all economic value in the hosting layer rather than the software layer?

Re: Amazon DocumentDB, with MongoDB compatibility

#145
post #74

I'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.

This is hopefully a good counterexample. Amazon's Elasticsearch Service is pretty bad (poor general performance, very slow to make cluster changes/launch new clusters, etc).

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

#146
post #114

Earlier 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

Their API is core tech? That’s like saying there shouldn’t be separate implementations of Java, right?

Re: Amazon DocumentDB, with MongoDB compatibility

#147
I really wish this were priced more along the lines of https://www.compose.com/pricing - a $200/m floor is a tough dB cost to absorb on smaller yet important projects. Suppose an app has a few mb of data and maybe one day hits 100mb of awesomeness I really have to pay $200/m here?

I get it, I love Aws, just wish this was priced differently.

Re: Amazon DocumentDB, with MongoDB compatibility

#148
post #127
post #79

Earlier 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…

Could Mongo or other companies use the Oracle v. Google precedent regarding API copyright to extract money from competitive vultures like Amazon?

Re: Amazon DocumentDB, with MongoDB compatibility

#149
post #18

If 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

I would guess the pricing model is actually closely related to the main dimensions of their costs and is quite valid.

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

#150
post #127

Earlier 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?

Oracle are the good guys in this scenario?
Post reply on HN