Aerospike VS Mongodb

Let’s have a detailed comparison of Aerospike vs Mongodb to find out which one is better. Let’s discover some of the essential factors that you must consider and decide whether Aerospike or Mongodb fits your business.

When we talk about data management solutions (DBMS), MongoDB and Aerospike are two leading platforms that come to our mind. Each offers unique features and capabilities tailored to diverse business needs. But which one is an ideal option for you? While both platforms aim to provide efficient and scalable data storage solutions, they differ significantly in terms of architecture, performance, and use cases.

So, let's have a detailed comparison of Aerospike versus MongoDB in terms of different aspects. By the end of this comparison, you can easily tell which platform will be best for your specific database management requirements.

MongoDB and Aerospike: Overview

Before we compare Aerospike vs MongoDB, let’s understand a bit about both these NoSQL databases.

MongoDB was founded in 2007, and it is a versatile document-oriented database which is designed for scalability, flexibility, and ease of development. It features a document-oriented data model, allowing developers to store and retrieve data in JSON-like documents. It is well-suited for applications that need complex data models, dynamic schemas, and scalability across distributed systems.

In contrast, Aerospike, previously known as CitrusLeaf, offers a high-performance key-value store architecture which is well optimized for speed and efficiency. Its in-memory database capabilities coupled with solid state drive (SSD) storage enable lightning-fast data access and processing. This makes it ideal for real-time applications that need high throughput and low latency.

MongoDB vs. Aerospike: Pros and Cons

• MongoDB doesn't have a built-in solution for handling writes across geographically distributed clusters. On the other hand, Aerospike offers cross-datacenter replication (XDR) for geographically distributed deployments, making it suitable for edge computing.
• Aerospike can scale horizontally with ease. It does not require any complex sharding configuration unlike MongoDB.
• MongoDB supports over 25 programming languages including C++, C#, C, Dart, ERlang, and more. On the surface, Aerospike offers fewer languages compared to MongoDB and supports around 15 languages such as C, Java, Go, PHP, Python, Ruby etc.
• Aerospike only works with Linux OS natively. You need to use Docker to run it on other operating systems. Nevertheless, MongoDB is available for Windows, macOS, Solaris and even Linux.

MongoDB vs. Aerospike: In Terms of Features

Both MongoDB and Aerospike differ from each other when it comes to query language, data model, sharding durability and more. Here is a comparison between MongoDB and Aerospike in terms of features:

• Query Language: MongoDB uses a variant of JavaScript called MQL (MongoDB Query Language) for querying data. MQL offers a familiar syntax for developers familiar with JavaScript and allows for complex queries, including aggregations and geospatial queries. Whereas Aerospike uses its own proprietary query language called AQL (Aerospike Query Language). AQL is specifically designed for Aerospike's key-value model and offers basic filtering and retrieval capabilities. This gives MongoDB an upper hand over Aerospike in terms of querying language.
• Data Model: MongoDB uses a flexible data model and stores data in JSON-like documents with flexible schema. This means that each document can have a different structure, which allows for easy evolution of data structures over time. However, there might be some complexity to query the data due to schema flexibility. Aerospike on the other hand, stores data in key-value pairs with optional record types which offer faster data retrieval due to simpler structure. This requires faster lookups but requires more upfront schema design.
• Indexing: MongoDB and a few other MongoDB alternatives offer a variety of indexing options including single-field, compound, multi-key, and text indexes. This flexibility allows for efficient querying of various data structures. Aerospike primarily uses secondary indexes for faster retrieval based on specific fields. Indexes need to be pre-defined for efficient querying, which requires upfront planning. So, when it comes to indexing, MongoDB offers better flexibility and write performance compared to Aerospike.
• Sharding: MongoDB supports manual sharding and it requires manual configuration which involves splitting the database across multiple servers (shards) based on a shard key. This can be complex to manage and requires careful planning for optimal performance. On the surface, Aerospike and some other Aerospike alternatives offer automatic sharding where data is automatically distributed across nodes using a hashing function on the record key. This simplifies cluster management and eliminates the need for manual sharding configuration.
• Durability: With MongoDB, data is written to the primary node's memory by default, and then the data is asynchronously replicated to secondary nodes. This means there's a small chance of data loss if the primary node fails before replication. You can configure synchronous replication for stronger durability, but this can further impact write performance. Whereas Aerospike ensures better data durability by writing data to both memory and disk (SSD) before replicating it to secondary nodes. This provides strong durability and a minimal risk of data loss even in case of hardware failures.
• Scaling Approach: MongoDB scales horizontally by adding more nodes to a cluster. This process involves sharding, which partitions data across nodes based on a shard key. This approach is powerful, but sharding can be complex to configure and manage, especially at large scale. For that matter, Aerospike scales horizontally with automatic data distribution across nodes. It uses a hashing function to distribute data, eliminating the need for manual sharding. This approach simplifies cluster management and can be easier to scale as compared to MongoDB.

Aerospike vs. MongoDB: Performance

Aerospike is designed for high performance and low latency. It prioritizes speed and efficiency, making it ideal for real-time applications with high throughput and demanding read/write workloads.

On the contrary, MongoDB offers good performance for most use cases, especially with proper indexing. However, writing performance can be slower for large datasets or complex queries.

MongoDB vs. Aerospike: Integration

MongoDB offers a wider range of native integrations with various programming languages, frameworks, and cloud platforms. There are also several third-party libraries and tools available for further integration possibilities. Aerospike provides client libraries in various languages like Java, Python, Node.js, etc., allowing developers to interact with the database. However, the overall integration ecosystem might be smaller compared to MongoDB, especially for specific frameworks and cloud platforms.

MongoDB vs. Aerospike: Visualization

MongoDB has an advantage over Aerospike as it provides a user-friendly web-based interface (MongoDB Compass) for database management and visualization. It offers intuitive tools for querying and monitoring. On the other hand, Aerospike offers a comprehensive web-based management console, Aerospike Management Console (AMC), which provides real-time insights but is not as robust as MongoDB’s Compass.

MongoDB vs. Aerospike: Customer Support

MongoDB provides comprehensive customer support through documentation, community forums, and professional services, offering expert assistance for troubleshooting and optimization. Aerospike offers dedicated support channels, including phone and email support, along with extensive documentation and training resources.

Which is Better, MongoDB or Aerospike?

Both MongoDB and Aerospike offer robust data management solutions with unique strengths and capabilities.

MongoDB excels in flexibility, scalability, and query flexibility, making it suitable for a wide range of use cases, including content management systems, e-commerce platforms, and real-time analytics applications.

Aerospike stands out for its exceptional performance, low-latency access, and high availability, making it ideal for high-throughput transactional applications, real-time bidding platforms, and gaming applications demanding real-time responsiveness.

Ultimately, the choice between MongoDB and Aerospike depends on specific application requirements, performance objectives, and scalability needs.