MongoDB and similar database technologies - mongodb

What are comparable database like Mongo DB?
We are trying to evaluate Mongo DB and find the best database for a enterprise level application.
Is there any developer UI and admin UI available for MongoDB like SQL Plus/Toad etc for Oracle?

MongoDB is a document-oriented database, so instead of a row of data, you have a document. In MonogDB's case, its a JSON document. Apache's CouchDB is another document database that stores data in JSON format although there are subtle differences between the two.
Choosing between the two depends on your use case. Sometimes CouchDB is better than MongoDB.
Checkout this comparative to see the differences.

MongoDB is what is known as a NoSQL database, which is I assume why you're interested in it. You can find a list of other NoSQL databases at the below links:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NoSQL
http://nosql-database.org/
MongoDB does not include a GUI-style administrative interface; however, there are numerous community projects that provide admin UIs for MongoDB:
http://www.mongodb.org/display/DOCS/Admin+UIs

I like document oriented databases like MongoDB very much. Because they are shema-less. You can just insert find and update your records without first having to define a schema. But you can define one in your own Project logic. You have more freedom.
It would be nice to have an embeddable NoSQL database. Like SQLite but document oriented.
Currently I do develop one in Java. (You can also use it withhin an Android App):
https://github.com/neo-expert/thingdb

I am quite happy with MongoVue. I've made a couple of videos about this here.

Related

MongoDB data modeling - separate or combine collections?

i have a question for the performance in meteorJS. Before i used meteorJS is always wrote my Applications in PHP and MySQL. In MySQL i always created a lot of tables with many connections betweens them.
For example:
Table User
id;login;password;email
Table User_Data
user_id;name;age
My questions is now how i have to design my MongoDB collections. Its nice that the collection are build like js objects so i dont have to predesign my tables and can always easy change the collumns. But is it better to combine all data to one collection or to several collections ?
For example:
Table User
_id;login;password;email;data:{name;age}
Is it better or worse for the performance ? Or is it the wrong pattern to design MongoDB Collections ?
The question mainly about MongoDB data modeling. What you'll learn applies to MongoDB used with Meteor or with anything else.
http://docs.mongodb.org/manual/data-modeling/ talks about data modeling with MongoDB and is a good introduction.
In your particular case, you can read more about how to avoid JOINs in MongoDB.

Combining Neo4J and MongoDB : Consistency

I am experimenting a lot these days, and one of the things I wanted to do is combine two popular NoSQL databases, namely Neo4j and MongoDB. Simply because I feel they complement eachother perfectly. The first class citizens in Neo4j, the relations, are imo exactly what's missing in MongoDB, whereas MongoDb allows me to not put large amounts of data in my node properties.
So I am trying to combine the two in a Java application, using the Neo4j Java REST binding, and the MongoDB Java driver. All my domain entities have a unique identifier which I store in both databases. The other data is stored in MongoDB and the relations between entities are stored in Neo4J. For instance, both databases contain a userid, MongoDB contains the profile information, and Neo4J contains friendship relations. With the custom data access layer I have written, this works exactly like I want it to. And it's fast.
BUT... When I want to create a user, I need to create both a node in Neo4j and a document in MongoDB. Not necessarily a problem, except that Neo4j is transactional and MongoDB is not. If both were transactional, I would just roll back both transactions when one of them fails. But since MongoDB isn't transactional, I cannot do this.
How do I ensure that whenever I create a user, either both a Node and Document are created, or none of both. I don't want to end up with a bunch of documents that have no matching node.
On top of that, not only do I want my combined database interaction to be ACID compliant, I also want it to be threadsafe. Both the GraphDatabaseService and the MongoClient / DB are provided from singletons.
I found something about creating "Transaction Documents" in MongoDB, but I realy don't like that approach. I would like something nice and clean like the neo4j beginTx, tx.success, tx.failure, tx.finish setup. Ideally, something I can implement in the same try/catch/finally block.
Should I perhaps make a switch to CouchDB, which does appear to be transactional?
Edit : After some more research, sparked by a comment, I came to realize that CouchDB is also not suitable for my specific needs. To clarify, the Neo4j part is set in stone. The Document Store database is not as long as it has a Java Library.
Pieter-Jan,
if you are able to use Neo4j 2.0 you can implement a Schema-Index-Provider (which is really easy) that creates your documents transactionally in MongoDB.
As Neo4j makes its index providers transactional (since the beginning), we did that with Lucene and there is one for Redis too (needs to be updated). But it is much easier with Neo4j 2.0, if you want to you can check out my implementation for MapDB. (https://github.com/jexp/neo4j-mapdb-index)
Although I'm a huge fan of both technologies, I think a better option for you could be OrientDB. It's a graph (as Neo4) and document (as MongoDB) database in one and supports ACID transactions. Sounds like a perfect match for your needs.
As posted here https://stackoverflow.com/questions/23465663/what-is-the-best-practice-to-combine-neo4j-and-mongodb?lq=1, you might have a look on Structr.
Its backend can be regarded as a Document database around Neo4j. It's fully transactional and open-source.

Grapical database builder for MongoDB (like DBForge for MySQL)

I really like DBForge with it's ability to create database schemes with a graphical UI.
Is there a tool like that for MongoDB?
Basically I'm looking for a tool that helps creating clean MongoDB Collections and Documents.
I'm starting a very big project in a few weeks and need to design a pretty huge MongoDB Database with lots of collections. So to keep everything organized I would like to have something graphical to look at instead of just coding the entities and their properties.
Try Mongo Explorer # http://mongoexplorer.com/ as it has some of the options you are looking for.
Good luck
I'm not aware of any specific MongoDB 'schema' designer. Since a collection is itself schema-less it's hard to imagine exactly what that would look like. You might for example decide in your database to store People, Cats and Cars all in the same collection because it happens to make it easier to query across them by name.
Typically I just use a standard class-viewer or entity designer for those occasions when I do want to see a graphical view of the objects that will be persisted as documents.
Relationships are also tricky for a graphical tool - sometimes all you have is an ObjectId, sometimes you denormalize and have maybe a Name and an ObjectId allowing you to display a list without fetching each item and sometimes you store an entire copy of the other object embedded in the current object.
You can even come up with ways to store data in MongoDB to mimic multiple-inheritance. Since most graphical entity designers support only single inheritance you would again have issues trying to use them with MongoDB.
In summary I recommend that you model your entities using whatever entity designer you have for the language you will be using and then worry about how to map them to collections to support your query and update patterns, adjusting them as necessary to denormalize parts of the data where you need performance, or to share a common field (by interface or inheritance) where you want to be able to easily search across entity types (e.g. string[] Tags, or string Name).
UI / GUI Admin Tools for MongoDB
This waas answered in this post.
I an using robomongo and its good.
The latest version supports 3.0 as well.
http://mongodb-tools.com/tool/robomongo/
http://robomongo.org/

What NoSQL database to use as replacement for MySQL?

When it comes to NoSQL, there are bewildering number of choices to select a specific NoSQL database as is clear in the NoSQL wiki.
In my application I want to replace mysql with NOSQL alternative. In my application I have user table which has one to many relation with large number of other tables. Some of these tables are in turn related to yet other tables. Also I have a user connected to another user if they are friends.
I do not have documents to store, so this eliminates document oriented NoSQL databases.
I want very high performance.
The NOSQL database should work very well with Play Framework and scala language.
It should be open source and free.
So given above, what NoSQL database I should use?
I think you may be misunderstanding the nature of "document databases". As such, I would recommend MongoDB, which is a document database, but I think you'll like it.
MongoDB stores "documents" which are basically JSON records. The cool part is it understands the internals of the documents it stores. So given a document like this:
{
"name": "Gregg",
"fave-lang": "Scala",
"fave-colors": ["red", "blue"]
}
You can query on "fave-lang" or "fave-colors". You can even index on either of those fields, even the array "fave-colors", which would necessitate a many-to-many in relational land.
Play offers a MongoDB plugin which I have not used. You can also use the Casbah driver for MongoDB, which I have used a great deal and is excellent. The Rogue query DSL for MongoDB, written by FourSquare is also worth looking at if you like MongoDB.
MongoDB is extremely fast. In addition you will save yourself the hassle of writing schemas because any record can have any fields you want, and they are still searchable and indexable. Your data model will probably look much like it does now, with a users "collection" (like a table) and other collections with records referencing a user ID as needed. But if you need to add a field to one of your collections, you can do so at any time without worrying about the older records or data migration. There is technically no schema to MongoDB records, but you do end up organizing similar records into collections.
MongoDB is one of the most fun technologies I have happened to come across in the past few years. In that one happy Saturday I decided to check it out and within 15 minutes was productive and felt like I "got it". I routinely give a demo at work where I show people how to get started with MongoDB and Scala in 15 minutes and that includes installing MongoDB. Shameless plug if you're into web services, here's my blog post on getting started with MongoDB and Scalatra using Casbah: http://janxspirit.blogspot.com/2011/01/quick-webb-app-with-scala-mongodb.html
You should at the very least go to http://try.mongodb.org
That's what got me started.
Good luck!
At this point the answer is none, I'm afraid.
You can't just convert your relational model with joins to a key-value store design and expect it to be a 1:1 mapping. From what you said it seems that you do have joins, some of them recursive, i.e. referencing another row from the same table.
You might start by denormalizing your existing relational schema to move it closer to a design you wish to achieve. Then, you could see more easily if what you are trying to do can be done in a practical way, and which technology to choose. You may even choose to continue using MySQL. Just because you can have joins doesn't mean that you have to, which makes it possible to have a non-relational design in a relational DBMS like MySQL.
Also, keep in mind - non-relational databases were designed for scalability - not performance! If you don't have thousands of users and a server farm a traditional relational database may actually work better for you.
Hmm, You want very high performance of traversal and you use the word "friends". The first thing that comes to mind is Graph Databases. They are specifically made for this exact case.
Try Neo4j http://neo4j.org/
It's is free, open source, but also has commercial support and commercial licensing, has excellent documentation and can be accessed from many languages (REST interface).
It is written in java, so you have native libraries or you can embedd it into your java/scala app.
Regarding MongoDB or Cassendra, you now (Dec. 2016, 5 years late) try longevityframework.org.
Build your domain model using standard Scala idioms such as case classes, companion objects, options, and immutable collections. Tell us about the types in your model, and we provide the persistence.
See "More Longevity Awesomeness with Macro Annotations! " from John Sullivan.
He provides an example on GitHub.
If you've looked at longevity before, you will be amazed at how easy it has become to start persisting your domain objects. And the best part is that everything persistence related is tucked away in the annotations. Your domain classes are completely free of persistence concerns, expressing your domain model perfectly, and ready for use in all portions of your application.

NoSQL engines that support dynamic queries?

What "NoSQL" database engines support dynamic / advanced queries in a similar fashion to MongoDB (http://www.mongodb.org/display/DOCS/Advanced+Queries) ?
Specifically interested in options that support ad-hoc querying from a shell or within client languages.
None just use MongoDB ;)
Honestly, it really depends on what type of querying you plan to do. For Key/Value style queries where you plan to just pull up one document at a time, then basically all of the NoSQL DBs are good for this.
When it comes to pulling back "sets" of data or using alternate keys, then MongoDB is probably your best "crossover" here. Many NoSQL DBs have limited querying functions, especially on non-key fields. Of course, that's kind of the point of "Key-Value stores", so Mongo is kind of a mutant here.
The last I checked with Cassandra, there was definitely some "hoop-jumping" involved to really support ad-hoc non-key queries. And CouchDB seems to point to "just Map / Reduce".
That stated, I believe that there is motion from several NoSQL dbs to support such ad-hoc querying mechanism. So this answer could be completely wrong in 2 months :)