Wow, you're serious. So FYI, postgres has had FTS for decades. TIN is possibly an improvement on existing PG behavior, but proprietary to planetscale.
Mongo's older search system was strictly worse than ancient standard FTS on postgres. About five years ago Mongo added more sophisticated search options. Standard PG search has been pretty stagnant, but there are PG extensions (like TIN, some proprietary some not) that add more sophistication.
In the mean time, Mongo doesn't let you use SQL unless you're directly a customer of MongoDB. The native primitives for aggregation in Mongo are ghastly and feel like the era of RDBMSes before query planners were a thing. Plus transactions... are relatively new.
I've used Mongo, there are things I like about Mongo, but the main benefit is horizontal scaling and the main penalty is any query more complex than get/put is hard. Whether that is worth it (especially compared to alternatives like CRDB, TiDB, or Spanner) is really very specific to you.
Wow, you're serious. So FYI, postgres has had FTS for decades. TIN is possibly an improvement on existing PG behavior, but proprietary to planetscale.
Mongo's older search system was strictly worse than ancient standard FTS on postgres. About five years ago Mongo added more sophisticated search options. Standard PG search has been pretty stagnant, but there are PG extensions (like TIN, some proprietary some not) that add more sophistication.
In the mean time, Mongo doesn't let you use SQL unless you're directly a customer of MongoDB. The native primitives for aggregation in Mongo are ghastly and feel like the era of RDBMSes before query planners were a thing. Plus transactions... are relatively new.
I've used Mongo, there are things I like about Mongo, but the main benefit is horizontal scaling and the main penalty is any query more complex than get/put is hard. Whether that is worth it (especially compared to alternatives like CRDB, TiDB, or Spanner) is really very specific to you.