We compared ScyllaDB and MongoDB across several key parameters based on reviews from actual users of both databases. While both are mature solutions, ScyllaDB's technical architecture gives it performance and scalability advantages for demanding workloads. But MongoDB provides a wider range of deployment options more aligned with early-stage growth. Below is a summary of our findings:
Based on user experiences, ScyllaDB's multiprimary design provides very high performance at scale, with solid throughput and low latency suited for data-intensive workloads. MongoDB offers more implementation flexibility but lags in scalability. For large-scale distributed applications, ScyllaDB has advantages in speed, simplicity and efficiency.
"It is really a pretty easy product to use. It's very reliable, it's proven."
"It is very fast - faster than an SQL or MySQL Server."
"MongoDB is extremely developer-friendly because when you are starting, there is very little time needed upfront in terms of planning."
"It's easy to add and remove things in MongoDB. You can alter the tables. MongoDB is faster at reading, slower at writings."
"The installation is very easy to do and understand."
"The most valuable features of MongoDB are the variety of translations available and the ability to deploy it on the cloud is useful. The cloud users can access the data, work on the data, and if they want to import or manipulate some data they can."
"It is easy to use."
"like its performance and the stability. It's very stable and, performance-wise, it's really great."
"It is lightweight, and it requires less infrastructure."
"The performance aspects of Scylla are good, as always... A good point about Scylla is that it can be used extensively."
"I think that MongoDB's search engine should be improved."
"We find it difficult to incorporate MongoDB in some projects."
"We'd like technical support to respond faster to queries."
"The auto transaction feature is something that I found a little bit problematic. If we want to run two or three transactions at a time, we get write conflicts. So, it becomes really difficult when concurrency comes into the picture."
"The solution can be a bit tough to set up if you don't have knowledge about how the database works."
"MongoDB can improve large-size video or media frame operations. There are a lot of customers who want to upload media frames and video games but there is some difficulty. In MongoDB, we are looking out for solutions that are for large-size media files that can be saved and navigated efficiently."
"Data encryption is possible using third-party tools but they should have their own encryption capability built-in to this solution."
"The solution should have better integration."
"Data export, along with how we can purchase the data periodically, needs to be improved so that the storage is within control. Then, we could optimize it even better."
"The documentation of Scylla is an area with shortcomings and needs to be improved."
MongoDB is ranked 1st in NoSQL Databases with 70 reviews while ScyllaDB is ranked 6th in NoSQL Databases with 2 reviews. MongoDB is rated 8.2, while ScyllaDB is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of MongoDB writes "Lightweight with good flexibility and very fast performance for searching data". On the other hand, the top reviewer of ScyllaDB writes "A solution that offers good performance and flexibility to its users". MongoDB is most compared with InfluxDB, Couchbase, Cassandra, Oracle NoSQL and Oracle Berkeley DB, whereas ScyllaDB is most compared with Cassandra, Couchbase, Apache HBase, Aerospike Database 7 and InfluxDB. See our MongoDB vs. ScyllaDB report.
See our list of best NoSQL Databases vendors.
We monitor all NoSQL Databases reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.