Amazon DocumentDB, with MongoDB compatibility • Hacker News Board

Re: Amazon DocumentDB, with MongoDB compatibility

#241

Post by jon-wood » Thu, Jan 10, 2019, 10:16 AM UTC

anonytrary wrote: post #220

k__ wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sounds like the latter to me, they probably implemented it on top of one of their other DBs.

Lmao I was a bit afraid this might be some surface-level API wrapper around DynamoDB, in which case this is less cool than I thought. It doesn't seem to be the case at a first glance but I wish it was a bit more clear on the site exactly how this relates to DynamoDB, if at all. Maybe I'll just have to read more about it. Hopefully the internal architecture gets away from DynamoDB-style partitioning.

From other comments here it looks like its built on top of Aurora rather than DynamoDB.

Re: Amazon DocumentDB, with MongoDB compatibility

#242

Post by sipos » Thu, Jan 10, 2019, 10:17 AM UTC

SpicyLemonZest wrote: post #116

dman wrote: 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.

> If MongoDB Inc is successful, it should be because they run a good document-database-as-a-service people want to use

Unfortunately, something that is good, and something people want to use, are not the same thing. People will use AWS's offering even if it is worse and harder to use, because it is bundled as part of AWS. That is a safe option (it can't be that bad if AWS has released it) and an easy one (no need to think about what to use, you are using AWS already.

Being a big provider of virtual machines puts them in a very strong position to sell loads of other stuff.

Re: Amazon DocumentDB, with MongoDB compatibility

#243

Post by craig_peacock » Thu, Jan 10, 2019, 10:32 AM UTC

I would actually like to thank AWS for focusing on supporting Open APIs. Let the community design the standards and operations and let the vendors compete to implement them, open source included.

Re: Amazon DocumentDB, with MongoDB compatibility

#244

Post by Corrado » Thu, Jan 10, 2019, 10:51 AM UTC

senderista wrote: post #182

mrep wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Definitely because it was faster. Amazon's strategy is to launch new features ASAP and then rely on everyone having to be on-call to fix shit when it inevitably breaks in prod because they rushed to launch. I will admit that while their "operational excellence" is shit, the security engineers do have quite a bit of power to block launches so their security isn't as bad as the reliability. However, the fact that write…

I was there for the launch of a major AWS service where they had an entire separate team working on the next iteration since well before launch (because the initial design wasn’t even intended to be sustainable). They are happy to incur technical risk (and in this case, to eat major losses in hardware costs) in order to be first to market.

We used MongoDB in my last job and I just want to say that I would have given up management of that beast in a heartbeat. We didn't stress MongoDB nearly enough to warrant all the effort required to construct it, monitor it, back it up, etc. Even if the performance was crappy, I would have lobbied hard to change to DocumentDB ASAP.

Re: Amazon DocumentDB, with MongoDB compatibility

#245

Post by zbentley » Thu, Jan 10, 2019, 10:55 AM UTC

spullara wrote: post #158

naner wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oracle are the good guys in this scenario?

They always were the OK guys in that argument. Google invented a whole new VM and bastardized the language just to get out of a $1/device licensing fee for mobile uses. The Java ecosystem has been irreparably harmed by Dalvik and its lack of support for more modern versions of Java. On another note, anyone that doesn't think API design is a creative endeavor and worthy of protection probably has never made a great AP…

> The Java ecosystem has been irreparably harmed by Dalvik and its lack of support for more modern versions of Java.

So if ReactOS gets popular but doesn't support Windows 10 APIs, will it be harming the windows ecosystem? If popular implementations of a tool exist that don't chase other (official or not) implementations' features but still get lots of users, that probably means that the popular implementations provide other benefits.

> API design is a creative endeavor

I agree with that.

> and worthy of [legal] protection

But not that.

Re: Amazon DocumentDB, with MongoDB compatibility

#246

Post by zimbatm » Thu, Jan 10, 2019, 11:07 AM UTC

ifcologne wrote: post #218

Lazare wrote: 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…

Pricing for smaller workloads is better on MongoDB Atlas right now. The DocumentDB performance pays of for super large collections and really high read/write workloads.

As a DevOps consultant; if Amazon is already setup as a vendor, I would just use DocumentDB. Setting up a vendor can be a major hassle and is not worth the saving of a few $$ per month. It's also much cheaper than spinning up and managing a EC2 instance with MongoDB installed on it since most of the operational knowledge can be deferred to AWS.

Re: Amazon DocumentDB, with MongoDB compatibility

#247

Post by k__ » Thu, Jan 10, 2019, 11:17 AM UTC

jon-wood wrote: post #241

anonytrary wrote: post #220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lmao I was a bit afraid this might be some surface-level API wrapper around DynamoDB, in which case this is less cool than I thought. It doesn't seem to be the case at a first glance but I wish it was a bit more clear on the site exactly how this relates to DynamoDB, if at all. Maybe I'll just have to read more about it. Hopefully the internal architecture gets away from DynamoDB-style partitioning.

From other comments here it looks like its built on top of Aurora rather than DynamoDB.

On the other hand they used MySQL as DynamoDB base, so maybe they will switch DynamoDB to Aurora too?

Re: Amazon DocumentDB, with MongoDB compatibility

#248

Post by Corrado » Thu, Jan 10, 2019, 11:26 AM UTC

jkchu wrote: post #65

napsterbr wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Surprised they didn't go with a 3-letter acronym. AWS DDB. Recently I made a typo on a formal document. Wrote "AMI" when I meant to to write "IAM". Oops.

I would have preferred AWS D2B.

My brain keeps trying to parse this into either DB2 or some Star Wars reference (R2DB, RD2B, etc.)

Re: Amazon DocumentDB, with MongoDB compatibility

#249

Post by Corrado » Thu, Jan 10, 2019, 11:31 AM UTC

social_quotient wrote: post #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.

Another thought along these same lines is how do you host non-production (Dev, QA, Demo, etc.) environments without spending a fortune? Sure my production workload is 15TB but my development system is only running 15GB and I want to develop against what I deploy to.

Re: Amazon DocumentDB, with MongoDB compatibility

#250

Post by tebs1200 » Thu, Jan 10, 2019, 11:45 AM UTC

gaius wrote: post #204

SpicyLemonZest wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

because they run a good document-database-as-a-service Spoiler: they do not

They don't?

I've been using Atlas for over a year now and I don't have any complaints. It was super quick to set up and I've never had a single issue in terms of performance or availability.

What have your issues with Atlas been?