MongoDB vs Firebase [closed] - ios

Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 4 years ago.
Improve this question
MongoDB vs Firebase
What are some quantitative advantages of using Firebase over MongoDB? (not opinions)
I know that Firebase is a cloud-based service with its own API, but I feel like Mongo may give me greater control in the long run.

Firebase is a real-time engine with backward connectivity. I.e. you might build a cross-platform app where clients subscribe to events on specific data and server actively informs clients about changes
The data layer is hosted for you. Mind that it is highly scalable. It's a nice kickstarter solution. Including auth management
Geo-Fire. Real-time geo coordinates solution.
Evident drawbacks of Firebase are:
You have to pay for it as soon as you start growing
You can't host datalayer (if owning data is critical or you develop an app for some separated subnet)
EDIT: here is a nice article how to replace Firebase in your app with Node.js+MongoDb. It shows how much work you would have to do on your own, and explains, IMHO, why a startup (small app) should begin with Firebase (if real-time updates to clients are required) and proceed with MongoDb (in any case self-written solution) if the project keeps evolving
EDIT 2: after being acquired by Google Firebase now offers various perks on top of its basic features which you would struggle to build on your own:
For development
Cloud Messaging: Deliver and receive messages across platforms reliably
File Storage: Easy file storage (including iOS)
Hosting: deliver static files from Firebase's servers (Included in Free plan)
Crash Reporting: Not a full logging service, but crucial help
For growth
Remote Config: Customize your app on the fly: suitable for A/B testing
Dynamic Links: Send users to the right place inside your app
Notifications: Engage with users at the right moment

Apples and oranges. Firebase is a Backend-as-a-Service containing identity management, realtime data views and a document database. It runs in the cloud.
MongoDB on the other hand is a full fledged database with a rich query language. In principle it runs on your own machine, but there are cloud providers.
If you are looking for the database component only MongoDB is much more mature and feature-rich.

Firebase is designed for real-time updates. It easily integrates with angular. Both are NoSQL databases. MongoDB can also do this with Angular through Socket.io integration. Meteor.js also makes use of MongoDB with an open socket connection for real-time updates.
MongoDB can be run locally, or hosted on many different cloud based providers. Firebase, in my opinion is great for smaller apps, very quick to get up and running. MongoDB is ideal for more robust larger apps, real-time integration is possible but it takes a bit more work.

After using Firebase a considerable amount I've come to find something.
If you intend to use it for large, real time apps, it isn't the best choice. It has its own wide array of problems including a bad error handling system and limitations. You will spend significant time trying to understand Firebase and it's kinks. It's also quite easy for a project to become a monolithic thing that goes out of control. MongoDB is a much better choice as far as a backend for a large app goes.
However, if you need to make a small app or quickly prototype something, Firebase is a great choice. It'll be incredibly easy way to hit the ground running.

I will answer this question in terms of AngularFire, Firebase's library for Angular.
Tl;dr: superpowers. :-)
AngularFire's three-way data binding. Angular binds the view and the $scope, i.e., what your users do in the view automagically updates in the local variables, and when your JavaScript updates a local variable the view automagically updates. With Firebase the cloud database also updates automagically. You don't need to write $http.get or $http.put requests, the data just updates.
Five-way data binding, and seven-way, nine-way, etc. I made a tic-tac-toe game using AngularFire. Two players can play together, with the two views updating the two $scopes and the cloud database. You could make a game with three or more players, all sharing one Firebase database.
AngularFire's OAuth2 library makes authorization easy with Facebook, GitHub, Google, Twitter, tokens, and passwords.
Double security. You can set up your Angular routes to require authorization, and set up rules in Firebase about who can read and write data.
There's no back end. You don't need to make a server with Node and Express. Running your own server can be a lot of work, require knowing about security, require that someone do something if the server goes down, etc.
Fast. If your server is in San Francisco and the client is in San Jose, fine. But for a client in Bangalore connecting to your server will be slower. Firebase is deployed around the world for fast connections everywhere.

Firebase is a suite of features .
Realtime Database
Hosting
Authentication
Storage
Cloud Messaging
Remote Config
Test Lab
Crash Reporting
Notifications
App Indexing
Dynamic Links
Invites
AdWords
AdMob
I believe you are trying to compare Firebase Realtime Database with Mongo DB .
Firebase Realtime Database stores data as JSON format and syncs to all updates of the data to all clients listening to the data . It abstracts you from all complexity that is needed to setup and scale any database . I will not recommend firebase where you have lot of complex scenarios where aggregation of data is needed .(Queries that need SUM/AVERAGE kind of stuff ) . Though this is recently achievable using Firebase functions . Modeling data in Firebase is tricky . But it is the best way to get you started instantaneously .
MongoDB is a database. This give you lot of powerful features. But MongoDB when installed in any platform you need to manage it by yourself .
When i try to choose between Firebase or MongoDB(or any DB ) . I try to answer the following .
Are there many aggregation queries that gets executed .(Like in
case of reporting tool or BI tool ) . If Yes dont go for Firebase
Do i need to perform lot of transaction . (If yes then i would
not like to go with firebase) (Tranactions are somewhat easy though
after introduction of functions but that is also a overhead if lot of
transactions needs to be maintained)
What timeline do i have to get things up and running .(Firebase
is very easy to setup and integrate ).
Do i have expertise to scale up the DB and trouble shoot DB related
stuffs . (Firebase is more like SAAS so no need to worry about scaleability)

In my experience, working with Firebase is a huge advantage if you are trying to do user management, database, messaging sort of app since all of these features are already well integrated.
Like others have said, if you're just focused on the database/querying aspect, stick to mongo.

Firebase provides some good features like real time change reflection , easy integration of authentication mechanism , and lots of other built-in features for rapid web development.
Firebase, really makes Web development so simple that never exists. Firebase database is a fork of MongoDB.
What's the advantage of using Firebase over MongoDB?
You can take advantage of all built-in features of Firebase over MongoDB.

Related

Can Firebase be used with a Laravel web app

I am working on a project that will include a Laravel web application, Android application, and iOS application. I am new to iOS. Since a user's data will need to be synchronized across all platforms, I assume the optimal way to do this is with a Relational Database (i.e. MySQL) and a PHP Web Service that interacts with the mobile apps.
Everything I see online says to basically use Firebase for mobile apps. There is a lot of work to create the PHP Web Services necessary. I am surprised the dominant recommendation is to use Firebase. About every iPhone app I have has both web and mobile platforms where data must be synchronized. I assume they cannot use Firebase and must use PHP Web Services.
Am I missing something?
You are absolutely correct that it is not a foregone conclusion that one would use Firebase. It’s a great solution that fills a particular niche, but developing separate web services is extremely common. (I suspect that that your online research may be biased by the fact that most of these articles are likely geared for mobile developers who might not have the wherewithal to develop, maintain, and support their own web server infrastructure.)
That having been said, I would not have jumped to the conclusion that the “optimal” way would be to write your own backend going against some RDBMS. These NoSQL solutions, like Firebase, are perfectly up to the job in most cases. There are pros and cons on both sides of the NoSQL vs RDBMS discussion (which is probably beyond the scope of this question).
So, do not be unduly biased by these Firebase articles you found online, but consider adding it to your tech stack if:
there are some compelling Firebase features that you don’t want to reinvent yourself (e.g. the integrated authentication options are nice; the realtime observers for database changes is a killer feature, if you need that; etc.);
the NoSQL paradigm of Firebase’s “Real-time Database” fits your app’s requirements; and
you need backend server capabilities, but don’t want to deal with the overhead of developing and maintaining your own backend.
In your case, because you’re already developing a Laravel app, that largely undermines that last rationale, because you’ve obviously already signed up for that.
So, it is just a question of what Firebase features you need and whether these features are compelling enough to justify adding Firebase to your tech stack. But don’t use Firebase because you found a bunch of articles advocating for it. Nor should you dismiss Firebase because you fear it won’t be “optimal”. It depends.
All of that having been said, the excellent, seamless, object-to-database mapping that Laravel provides really begs for the SQL database approach. If you tried to use Firebase for the backend, you’d likely lose a lot of the benefits of Laravel.

Bundle Firebase JavaScript Serverless code on device for access when offline

Background: My company currently has an iOS app built on a firebase / google servierless backend. We use callable functions extensively to centralize common business logic in the backend for reuse with our web app. We also have future plans for Android app development and would like to leverage this centralized business logic.
Problem: Many of our users use our iOS app in places where internet connectivity is limited (typically large concrete buildings).
Need: Is there a preferred approach to bundle cloud function JS code on device, similar to how custom TensorFlow Lite ML models can be bundled on device. Ideally the iOS app would call callable functions first then call bundled on device functions if internet was unavailable.
In short is there an architectural pattern to solve this problem similar to how it's solved for TensorFlow Lite, but for more rudimentary functions or algorithms without the ML overhead. Bonus would be a solution that works within firebase's existing solution set.
Cloud Functions runs only in the cloud. There is no on-device execution. An internet connection is always required to invoke callable functions.
If you're asking if there is a way to run some common code on device in a multi-platform way, that's off-topic for Stack Overflow. Please do some web searches or ask around in discussion forums to solicit some ideas.
There's nothing built into Firebase (or Google Cloud Functions) to run your functions code on the device itself. It's technically definitely possible, but it's just not part of the product - nor does a quick search show an effort from someone in the community.
It's not an unreasonable request though, so I'd recommend filing a feature request so that the Firebase team can consider it in the future. Until that time, you're on your own though.

Scaling from Firebase to Firebase on private server

I'm developing an iOS app that will contain sensitive health-data. AWS seems to have several health-focused clients that work with them (and probably have a VPS with them). The learning curve seems to be pretty steep for this.
I've familiarised myself with Firebase, which I really like. My plan is to use Firebase's Google cloud option for testing the app while I'm developing it, when the preliminary mock data I gather isn't sensitive. Then, I was going to set-up a VPS or private server with a company like Rackspace (UK-based), and then use this documentation to set-up Firebase on that server.
Does that seem stupid? I'm new to this, so any suggestions would be appreciated -- I'm looking for recommendations on how to set this up, bearing in mind that I'd like to quickly test things now and then scale up (and eventually keep the data as secure as possible).

Enterprise level SaaS - Relevant frameworks and methodology

I am beginning work on an individual project to bring an existing product out of the dark ages of classic ASP and into the light. My biggest decision to make before embarking on this lengthy journey is determining what frameworks and methodology I will implement for the new design.
Right now I am looking at MVC or MVVM (from what I gather this is just Silverlight?) for the web interface, Entity Framework or something I write myself as the model and MSSQL as the data.
Unfortunately I am just a fledgling programmer and I am not particularly aware of trends in the world of programming in general. I don't know what is just a passing fad and what technologies actually have lasting potential. I would really like to use something that is likely to remain relevant for some time. So I am looking to the professionals here for input on ideas that worked for you, pitfalls to watch out for and things to keep an eye on.
I appreciate any and all suggestions, keeping in mind that using the Microsoft and .Net is something of a prerequisite. I really want to make sure I am headed in the right direction before I start as this will probably take several months.
As for frameworks I personally suggest:
ASP.NET MVC 3 of MVC 4, depending on the question if beta software is allowed.
Entity Framework 4.3 or 5.0. 5.0 is a lot faster (is has auto compilation) but it's still a Release Candidate.
AutoMapper to map between Entities and ViewModels.
Ninject for dependency injection (useful if you want to write unit tests).
JQuery for stuff like clientside validation (integrates perfectly with ASP.NET MVC).
Possible some CSS framework like Bootstrap.
Maybe RestSharp so you can easily perform requests.
In case it's a cloud service (most SaaS are) and you'd like to host it on Azure (brilliant integration with the .NET stack) you'll need the Azure SDK.
As for software achitecture:
Use service layers
Use the repository patterns
Use ViewModels to pass to your view instead of entities
Set up a dependency injection container
That's my advice, I personally find this a golden combination for building enterprise applications (while not wasting too much time configuring lots of things).
Pitfalls:
I don't know if unit testing is really necessary. I should definately keep it in mind while setting up the architecture, but I personally choose to do that later because I don't even know if my product will succeed, so I can better put my time in building a fast Minimal Viable Product.
Don't assume anything. You can waste months of your precious time working on a cool feature that you think everyone will like, but often this is not the case. Do just the absolutely required minimum, and improve it later if your users like it.
I will add more to #Leon suggestions as I see those suggestion are great from application framework perspective, while I wanted to write here from cloud methodology perspective.
As you have chosen SaaS, definitely you are moving completely in Cloud while bring your application and data to cloud all together, that's great!!
There are several layers to any cloud application and to understand lets see what a cloud service stack look like. If we take an example of Windows Azure:
You have Compute, where your application runs with a web server (or not).
You have Azure table store which you can use to store key value pair in a row and then access them very fast.
You have Azure Queue allows decoupling of different parts of a cloud application, enabling cloud applications to be easily built with different technologies and easily scale with traffic needs.
You have Access Control Services to authenticate users through OpenID or AD
You have service bus to connect other services in cloud or on-premise at 3rd party.
You have Azure Blob storage to use as web based flat file server
You have Azure Cache (an in-memory cache build to scale in cloud)
You have SQL Azure as you cloud database
There are many more services which you can explorer and use
So when you decide to move your application from traditional web hosting to cloud you really have to look about how to take advantage of these different cloud services to scale your application when needed and save you lots of money.
With you application in Cloud you try something as below:
Keep you application logic as small as possible
Keep your static content outside the compute
Use cloud based cache for fast access as application scale out
Move data out of traditional RDBMS databases to NoSQL Framework (key-value pair, document etc to save money and flexibility), if possible and applicable
Take advantage of other available services to reduce application complexity
If you consider above aspect in your mind you will create a true cloud based application which will be fast and will save you money.

iPad local databases

What are the best local iPad databases?
CouchDB or SQLLite? Which is better?
What does Evernote use? What does Foursquare use?
I do not know what databases Evernore or Foursquare use on the iPad.
SQLite is currently the "best" database for mobile because it is already included and it is so small and light-weight. SQLite is one back-end in the Core Data API (which is most likely what Foursquare and Evernote use).
However, CouchDB is also very light-weight but it is not yet easy to use on iOS. If/when it does become easier, it will be ideal for mobile because it supports local, offline operation and has built-in synchronization with the central database.
Choosing from these two requires more thoughts:
For couchdb, the db is document oriented.
It also is using webservices(so you will have to handle these properly) and the basic CRUD is done via REST.
Pro:
If your app wants to replicate data to or from the outside world, couchdb handles this very easily and you have the ability to write couchapps, basically webapps running directly on the couchdbserver. These could be delivered as natve IOS apps, I assume, as it is now possible for Android: link
I am not familiar with basic patterns about handling data in IOS, but using a "driver" to use couchdb should be evaluated as well: http://www.couchone.com/page/couchdb-drivers

Resources