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

Amazon DocumentDB, with MongoDB compatibility

aws.amazon.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

311–320 of 323 posts

Re: Amazon DocumentDB, with MongoDB compatibility

#311

Post by HeavyStorm »

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.

Well, they are second to market this time around, Cosmos has had mongo api compatibility for a long time.

Re: Amazon DocumentDB, with MongoDB compatibility

#312

Post by HeavyStorm »

adaptiveValleys wrote: post #251
senderista wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I'm sure they are, so they a pass those lovely negative externalities onto the customer because they know it's in demand and only they provide that service. If only they had a competitor that could launch the same products a few months later but offered higher reliability off the bat, that could eventually force Amazon to improve their reliability or risk losing customers long term. Being first to market doesn't ensu…

> If only they had a competitor that could launch the same products a few months later but offered higher reliability off the bat, that could eventually force Amazon to improve their reliability or risk losing customers long term.

They have, it's Azure. I'm even a little bit scared because no one here is mentioning CosmosDB... It seems to me that most of the community only knows aws products.

Re: Amazon DocumentDB, with MongoDB compatibility

#313

Post by codepope »

Dj from MongoDB here. We have, obviously, been keeping up with this and other threads, but we've also been busy testing out Amazon DocumentDB's correctness and performance. While we're getting that together to bring you an official response in a few days, complete with test results and methodology, I'd like to pick up on a couple of points and some inaccuracies that have been repeated in various threads:

This move shows MongoDB’s approach to document databases is compelling. We’ve thought so for a long time.

A cloud-hosted, truly global and managed MongoDB, MongoDB Atlas, has existed for the last two and a half years and has been serving more and more satisfied users every day with some massive workloads.

MongoDB Atlas runs the full implementation of MongoDB in the cloud.

Many features of MongoDB are documented as not being implemented by DocumentDB: these include change streams, many aggregation operators including $lookup and $graphlookup. But beyond that, well let’s just say we’ve been staggered by how many tests DocumentDB has failed (no spoilers!).

The MongoDB API is not under an Apache license.

MongoDB drivers are still under the Apache license. The MongoDB server used to be licensed under AGPL and is now licensed under SSPL. The source code is open to all, as it has always been, at https://github.com/mongodb/mongo

DocumentDB is not cheaper than MongoDB Atlas. Preliminary estimates show this to only be the case with very large collections and very, very high read/write workloads.

There’ll be more next week over on the MongoDB blogs.

Dj

Re: Amazon DocumentDB, with MongoDB compatibility

#314

Post by manigandham »

danpalmer wrote: post #237
tanilama wrote: post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

AWS prioritizes launch above EVERYTHING. It is their strategy, to have market tells them what to build. I think it works, and AWS has yet been brought down by this horizontal complexity. Quite an achievement, but might not be a satisfying experience for the engineers work there.

This is one of the main reasons why I don't like AWS services, everything just seems so half-finished. There's not a lot in AWS that I would trust enough to use in production. I wonder how widespread this view is. I suspect it's more widespread than Amazon realise. They may have optimised into a local maximum where they get a lot of value from being first to market, but could potentially get more by being first to "v…

>> "viable to trust a business on"

They already are viable and trusted by multiple billion-dollar companies and governments.

Re: Amazon DocumentDB, with MongoDB compatibility

#315

Post by manigandham »

LamaOfRuin wrote: post #119
mabbo wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

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…

>> "whatever most customers are willing to reasonably happily pay"

Do you have a better idea of what this is then they do?

Considering they already have launch customers actively using this product and there are several comments on this page saying pricing is better than MongoDB?

Re: Amazon DocumentDB, with MongoDB compatibility

#316

Post by cthalupa »

keepper wrote: post #289

The current biggest threat to Free and Open Source software is cloud computing. Plain and simple.[0] I know this is a blunt and harsh statement to make, but when you sell a service, you have zero native incentives to Open Source the way your system works. It just opens up Competition. This is not unique to AWS/Amazon. But their success gives them the power to have wide OSS damage. This is, to me, the biggest reason w…

This comment is pretty bizarre when taken into account with the link you referenced. Unless I'm completely misreading what Cantrill is saying in that blog, I don't think he agrees with you.

>And while they’re at it, it would be great if they could please stop making outlandish threats about the demise of open source

>Adam’s fundamental optimism serves to remind us, too, that any perceived “danger” to open source is overblown: open source is going to endure

>and in the end, open source will survive its midlife questioning just as people in midlife get through theirs: by returning to its core values and by finding rejuvenation in its communities

Re: Amazon DocumentDB, with MongoDB compatibility

#317

Post by snissn »

codepope wrote: post #313

Dj from MongoDB here. We have, obviously, been keeping up with this and other threads, but we've also been busy testing out Amazon DocumentDB's correctness and performance. While we're getting that together to bring you an official response in a few days, complete with test results and methodology, I'd like to pick up on a couple of points and some inaccuracies that have been repeated in various threads: This move sh…

SSPL feels a lot like a bait and switch to me

Re: Amazon DocumentDB, with MongoDB compatibility

#318

Post by therealdrag0 »

codepope wrote: post #313

Dj from MongoDB here. We have, obviously, been keeping up with this and other threads, but we've also been busy testing out Amazon DocumentDB's correctness and performance. While we're getting that together to bring you an official response in a few days, complete with test results and methodology, I'd like to pick up on a couple of points and some inaccuracies that have been repeated in various threads: This move sh…

Any idea when Atlas will expand support for Sharding configurations and taggable zones? My impression is Atlas ONLY supports a 2 field shard, and the first shard MUST be location. Also it's impossible for clients to set write-concern to tags, because you don't support custom tags as MongoDB itself does.

Re: Amazon DocumentDB, with MongoDB compatibility

#319

Post by earenndil »

johncolanduoni wrote: post #216
earenndil wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Operating systems, compilers, and web browsers come to mind. There are currently: * 4 independently-developed competitive compilers (gcc, clang, msvc, icc) * 4 independently-developed competitive operating systems (windows, macos, linux, and bsd --I'm grouping the BSDs as one since their source code has a common ancestor) * 3 independently-developed competitive browser engines, soon-to-be 2 (edgehtml, gecko, webkit)…

Throwing Chrome/Blink under WebKit is a pretty hard sell at this point. They’ve diverged enough that supporting one far from guarantees you’ll support the other. You might as well replace WebKit with KHTML in your list.

For the purposes of licensing and simple inertia (what it takes to start a project from scratch) -- that work was done once, with khtml, sure.

Re: Amazon DocumentDB, with MongoDB compatibility

#320

Post by kstrauser »

apta wrote: post #306
kstrauser wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It was a temp table that we hadn't garbage collected yet. We don't make a habit of leaving that much junk data around, but it bumped our monthly storage bill several percent, not like tripled it.

Was this a relational or NoSQL DB?

It's primarily in things like Spark and Snowflake that act like relational DBs as long as you squint the right way.
Post reply on HN