Month: June 2023

Posted on nosqlgooglealerts. Visit nosqlgooglealerts

The NoSQL Market Report 2023 provides a comprehensive analysis of the industry with a focus on business strategies, major trends, and regional segments. It also includes valuable insights into the value chain analysis of key players – Microsoft Corporation, Neo Technology, Inc., MarkLogic Corporation, Aerospike, Inc., DataStax, Inc., Google LLC

“Final Report will add the analysis of the impact of COVID-19 on this industry.”

The most recent worldwide “NoSQL Market” research report for 2023-2029 provides in-depth information on the market’s current trends, demand, and most recent changes that are expected to affect the market’s growth in the coming year. This analysis covers new business development, pricing, revenue, gross margin, market size, share, and anticipated growth. It also covers emerging market strategies employed by leading rivals. The report also provides information on key market player profiles, focusing on the market’s size, segmentation, including product type (Key-Value Store, Document Databases, Column Based Stores), application (Retail, Gaming, IT), and region, competition environment, current state of affairs, and development trends.

The study also includes sales and revenue projections for the NoSQL Market for the years 2023 to 2029, broken down by region, kind, and application. Along with assessing the viability of new investment projects, the study also discusses the market environment and its development prospects for the foreseeable future and provides general research findings.

Get a sample PDF of the report at –– https://www.industryresearch.co/enquiry/request-sample/22376195

The NoSQL market research offers a thorough examination of the sector by emphasizing important elements including market drivers, constraints, and opportunities. The study also provides details on the most recent product developments, technical innovations, and business strategies used by significant market participants. It also assesses how the COVID-19 epidemic may affect the keyword market and its submarkets. By providing thorough details on the industry’s competitive environment, market trends, and future prospects, the study helps stakeholders make educated decisions.

Get a sample PDF of the NoSQL Market Report

The research industry has a number of key players who are driving innovation and growth in the sector. Some of the top players in the industry include:

• Microsoft Corporation
• Neo Technology, Inc.
• MarkLogic Corporation
• Aerospike, Inc.
• DataStax, Inc.
• Google LLC
• Amazon Web Services, Inc.
• PostgreSQL
• Couchbase, Inc.
• Objectivity, Inc.
• MongoDB, Inc.
• DDDD

These businesses have a significant market presence and provide clients in a variety of sectors with a wide range of research and analytics services. To keep ahead of the competition and satisfy changing customer expectations, they continually spend in research and development. To increase their commercial operations and obtain a competitive edge in the market, these businesses are also actively involved in mergers and acquisitions.

NoSQL Market Fragmented by Product Types:

• Key-Value Store
• Document Databases
• Column Based Stores
• Graph Database
• DDDD

Applications Covered in the Report are:

• Retail
• Gaming
• IT
• Others

Inquire or Share Your Questions If Any Before the Purchasing This Report

https://www.industryresearch.co/enquiry/pre-order-enquiry/22376195

Key Reasons to Buy NoSQL Market Report:

• Access to reliable data: Reports are often based on extensive research and analysis, and can provide you with reliable and accurate data that you can use to make informed decisions.
• Market insights: Reports can provide you with valuable insights into specific markets, including trends, opportunities, and challenges, that can help you understand the current state of the industry and identify potential growth areas.
• Competitive intelligence: Reports can also give you information on your competitors, including their market share, strategies, and product offerings, that can help you better position your own business.
• Strategic planning: By using the data and insights provided in a report, you can develop and implement more effective strategies for your business, such as product development, market expansion, or customer acquisition.
• Time-saving: Conducting your own research can be time-consuming and resource-intensive. Buying a report can save you time and effort by providing you with a comprehensive analysis of the topic at hand.
• Cost-effective: In some cases, buying a report may be more cost-effective than conducting your own research, particularly if you consider the time and resources that would be required to gather and analyze the data yourself.
• Overall, buying a report can provide you with valuable insights, data, and analysis that can help you make informed decisions and grow your business.

To Understand How Covid-19 Impact Is Covered in This Report

https://industryresearch.co/enquiry/request-covid19/22376195

Geographically, the report includes the research on production, consumption, revenue, market share and growth rate, and forecast (2017 -2029) of the following regions:

• United States
• Europe (Germany, UK, France, Italy, Spain, Russia, Poland)
• China
• Japan
• India
• Southeast Asia (Malaysia, Singapore, Philippines, Indonesia, Thailand, Vietnam)
• Latin America (Brazil, Mexico, Colombia)
• Middle East and Africa (Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, Turkey, Egypt, South Africa, Nigeria)
• Other Regions

Key Questions Answered in NoSQL Market Report:

• What is the size of the market for a particular product or service, and what are the key drivers and challenges affecting the market?
• Who are the major players in a particular industry or market, and what are their market shares, competitive strategies, and strengths and weaknesses?
• What are the current trends and future growth prospects for a particular industry or market, and what are the factors driving these trends?
• What are the regulatory and legal frameworks governing a particular industry or market, and what are the implications for businesses operating in this space?
• What are the opportunities and challenges facing businesses in a particular industry or market, and what are the key strategies and best practices for success?
• What are the key technological advancements and innovations driving growth and change in a particular industry or market?
• What are the key risks and uncertainties facing businesses in a particular industry or market, and what are the strategies for mitigating these risks?
• What are the consumer preferences and behaviors in a particular industry or market, and how are these preferences and behaviors evolving over time?
• Overall, a report should provide insights and answers to key questions that are relevant and important to the topic or industry being analyzed.

Purchase this Report (Price 3250 USD for a Single-User License) https://industryresearch.co/purchase/22376195

Detailed TOC of NoSQL Market Forecast Report 2023-2029:

1 NoSQL Market Overview

1.1 Product Overview and Scope of NoSQL

1.2 Segment by Type

1.3 Global Segment by Application

1.4 Global Market, Region Wise (2017-2022)

1.5 Global Market Size of NoSQL (2017-2029)

2 Global NoSQL Market Landscape by Player

2.1 Global NoSQL Sales and Share by Player (2017-2022)

2.2 Global Revenue and Market Share by Player (2017-2022)

2.3 Global Average Price by Player (2017-2022)

2.4 Global Gross Margin by Player (2017-2022)

2.5 Manufacturing Base Distribution, Sales Area and Product Type by Player

2.6 Market Competitive Situation and Trends

3 NoSQL Upstream and Downstream Analysis

3.1 Industrial Chain Analysis

3.2 Key Raw Materials Suppliers and Price Analysis

3.3 Key Raw Materials Supply and Demand Analysis

3.4 Manufacturing Process Analysis

3.5 Market Concentration Rate of Raw Materials

3.6 Downstream Buyers

3.7 Value Chain Status Under COVID-19

4 NoSQL Manufacturing Cost Analysis

4.1 Manufacturing Cost Structure Analysis

4.2 NoSQL Key Raw Materials Cost Analysis

4.3 Labor Cost Analysis

4.4 Energy Costs Analysis

4.5 RandD Costs Analysis

5 Market Dynamics

5.1 Drivers

5.2 Restraints and Challenges

5.3 Opportunities

5.3.1 Advances in Innovation and Technology for NoSQL

5.3.2 Increased Demand in Emerging Markets

5.4 NoSQL Industry Development Trends under COVID-19 Outbreak

5.4.1 Global COVID-19 Status Overview

5.4.2 Influence of COVID-19 Outbreak on NoSQL Industry Development

5.5 Consumer Behavior Analysis

6 Players Profiles

6.1 Company A

6.1.1 Basic Information, Manufacturing Base, Sales Area and Competitors

6.1.2 NoSQL Product Profiles, Application and Specification

6.1.3 NoSQL Market Performance (2017-2022)

6.1.4 Business Overview

6.2 Company B

6.2.1 Basic Information, Manufacturing Base, Sales Area and Competitors

6.2.2 NoSQL Product Profiles, Application and Specification

6.2.3 NoSQL Market Performance (2017-2022)

6.2.4 Business Overview

7 Global NoSQL Sales and Revenue Region Wise (2017-2022)

7.1 Global Sales and Market Share, Region Wise (2017-2022)

7.2 Global Revenue (Revenue) and Market Share, Region Wise (2017-2022)

7.3 Global Sales, Revenue, Price and Gross Margin (2017-2022)

8 Global NoSQL Sales, Revenue (Revenue), Price Trend by Type

8.1 Global Sales and Market Share by Type (2017-2022)

8.2 Global Revenue and Market Share by Type (2017-2022)

8.3 Global Price by Type (2017-2022)

8.4 Global Sales Growth Rate by Type (2017-2022)

9 Global NoSQL Market Analysis by Application

9.1 Global Consumption and Market Share by Application (2017-2022)

9.2 Global Consumption Growth Rate by Application (2017-2022)

10 Global NoSQL Market Forecast (2022-2029)

10.1 Global Sales, Revenue Forecast (2022-2029)

10.2 Global Sales and Revenue Forecast, Region Wise (2022-2029)

10.3 Global Sales, Revenue and Price Forecast by Type (2022-2029)

10.4 Global Consumption Forecast by Application (2022-2029)

10.5 NoSQL Market Forecast Under COVID-19

11 Research Findings and Conclusion

12 Appendix

12.1 Methodology

12.2 Research Data Source

For Detailed TOC – – https://industryresearch.co/TOC/22376195#TOC

Contact Us:

Contact Us:

Industry Research Co

Phone: US +14242530807

UK +44 20 3239 8187

Email: [email protected]

Web: https://www.industryresearch.co

Our Other Reports:

Acoustic Damping Tiles Market

Dothiepin Market

Chalcolite Market

Cloud Electronic Design Automation(Eda) Market

Contemporary Outdoor Chairs Market

Automotive High Performance Torque Converters Market

Environmental Thin Film Market

Special Silica Market

Global Bismuth Hydroxide Market

Global Generator in Healthcare Market

2-Ethylhexanoic Acid (Cas 149-57-5) Market

Thrust Ball Bearings Market

Pressure Sensitive Label Adhesives Market

Home Warranty Service Market

Instrumentation Tubing Market

Vitamin A Acetate Market

Neon Transformers Market

Global BOPP Tapes Market

IoT Chemical Sensor Market

Emergency Exit Sign Market

Virtual Private Cloud Market

Capsule Smart Projectors Market

Color Microprinting Market

Cosmetic Chemicals Market

Turnlock Fastener Market

Grease Fittings Market

Electronic Patient Reported Outcomes Market

Biodegradable Packing Peanuts Market

Cerebral Oximeters Market

Gas Mixing Equipment Market

Solid-Liquid Separation Equipment Market

Power Terminal Blocks Market

Mid-IR Lasers Market

Beta Blockers Market

Wi-Fi Analytics Market

Cigarette Packaging Printing Market

Hydraulic Nut Splitter Market

Ebselen Market

N-Methyldiethanolamine Market

Global Blood Product Market

Press Release Distributed by The Express Wire

To view the original version on The Express Wire visit NoSQL Market Share and Growth Estimates 2023 | Latest Technologies and Future Trends Forecast by 2029

Article originally posted on InfoQ. Visit InfoQ

Introduced at WWDC 2023, Swift 5.9, now available in beta, brings a major extension to the language capabilities through support for generating code at compile-time using macros.

Macros aim to extend the capabilities of a programming language by introducing constructs similar to language primitives and eliminate as much boilerplate as possible. Swift macros work at the AST (abstract syntax tree) level to enable to generate code at compile time that is fed back to the compiler. They should not be confused with C/C++ macros, which only carry through some kind of specialized string replacement, and are more akin to macros in languages such as Rust or Scala, although with their own particular twist.

Macros […] transform one AST into another AST without depending on any external state, and without making changes to any external state.

Swift has two kinds of macros: freestanding macros, which appear on their own, without being attached to a declaration; and attached macros, which modify the declaration of the program entity that follows them. Syntactically, freestanding macros are prefixed by #, attached macros by @:

#aFreestandingMacro("with argument")

@AttachedMacro struct AStruct {
...
}

To expand a macro, the Swift compiler goes through a sequence of steps, starting with building the program AST. Parts of the AST are sent to the macro implementation, which uses it to build its own expanded form. The compiler finally uses the expanded AST to replace the macro call and then ensures the resulting code is still valid. Macros can appear inside other macros, in which case the outer macro is expanded first and can thus modify the inner macro before it is expanded.

Contrary to other features of the language, Swift macros require you to separately specify a declaration and an implementation.

A macro declaration is introduced by the macro keyword and defines the places in the code where it can be called and the kind of code it generates. The following declaration for the Standard Library macro @OptionSet, which is meant as an easier way to work with the OptionSet protocol, tries to exemplify that:

@attached(member)
@attached(conformance)
public macro OptionSet() =
        #externalMacro(module: "SwiftMacros", type: "OptionSetMacro")

According to its declaration, the @OptionSet macro adds new members to its attached object and one or more protocol conformances. The declaration specifies also where the macro implementation can be found, e.g. in the “SwiftMacros” module, and which type provides its implementation, e.g. “OptionSetMacro”.

As you may have suspected by now, implementing a macro is not the most straightforward process, though, compared to other languages where the macro definition can be embedded in the same code that uses it. In fact, a macro in Swift is implemented as a library that provides a type, e.g., a struct, and belongs to its own target in your Xcode project. This can be made sense of by thinking that the macro expansion step is dealt with as an Xcode build phase, for which it greatly helps to have separate libraries to invoke.

The easiest way to create a macro is with the Swift Package manager using swift package init --type macro. This will provide a nice template for your macro declaration and implementation.

Without going into much detail about how a macro is implemented, it can be interesting to observe how strictly tied to your program AST macros are. In the following example, you can see how to declare a type that implements a macro expansion. It must provide an expansion(of:in:) method that receives the AST and the macro context as arguments and provides an ExprSyntax:

public struct FourCharacterCode: ExpressionMacro {

    public static func expansion(
        of node: some FreestandingMacroExpansionSyntax,
        in context: some MacroExpansionContext
    ) throws -> ExprSyntax {
...
}

Using the FreestandingMacroExpansionSyntax argument, the macro implementation can access the arguments passed to the macro as typed values. The return value is an ExprSyntax, from the SwiftSyntax project, that represents an expression in an AST. Since, ExprSyntax conforms to StringLiteralConvertible, the easiest way to build such an AST is as a String that you return from expansion(of:in:) and is automatically converted into an ExprSyntax.

As a last remark about Swift macros, if you throw an exception from a macro expansion implementation, it will be treated as a compile error at the malformed macro site, which promises to make macro debugging less of a headache than in other languages.

If you are interested in experimenting with Swift macros, you can download Xcode 15 beta or install the latest Swift toolchain in Xcode 14.

Posted on nosqlgooglealerts. Visit nosqlgooglealerts

Databricks on Wednesday introduced a new version of its data lakehouse offering, dubbed Delta Lake 3.0, in order to take on the rising popularity of Apache Iceberg tables used by rival Snowflake.

As part of Delta Lake 3.0, the company has introduced a new universal table format, dubbed UniForm, that will allow enterprises to use the data lakehouse with other table formats such as Apache Iceberg and Apache Hudi, the company said.

A data lakehouse is a data architecture that offers both storage and analytics capabilities, in contrast to the concepts for data lakes, which store data in native format, and data warehouses, which store structured data (often in SQL format).

UniForm eliminates the need for manually converting files from different data lakes and data warehouses while conducting analytics or building AI models, Databricks said.

The new table format, according to analysts, is Databricks’ strategy to connect its data lakehouse with the rest of the world and take on rival Snowflake, especially on the backdrop of Apache Iceberg garnering more multivendor support in the past few years.

“With UniForm, Databricks is essentially saying, if you can’t beat them, join them,” said Tony Baer, principal analyst at dbInsight, likening the battle between the table formats to the one between Apple’s iOS and Google’s Android operating system.

However, Baer believes that the adoption of lakehouses will depend on the ecosystem they provide and not just table formats.

“Adoption of data lakehouses is still very preliminary as the ecosystems have only recently crystallised, and most enterprises are still learning what lakehouses are,” Baer said, adding that lakehouses may see meaningful adoption a year from now.

Contrary to Baer, Databricks said its Delta Lake has seen nearly one billion downloads in a year. Last year, the company open sourced its Delta Lake offering and this according to the company has seen the lakehouse get updates from contributing engineers from AWS, Adobe, Twilio, eBay, and Uber.

Delta Kernel and liquid clustering

As part of Delta Lake 3.0, the company has also introduced two other features — Delta Kernel and a liquid clustering feature.

According to Databricks, Delta Kernel addresses connector fragmentation by ensuring that all connectors are built using a core Delta library that implements Delta specifications.

This alleviates the need for enterprise users to update Delta connectors with each new version or protocol change, the company said.

Delta Kernel, according to SanjMo principal analyst Sanjeev Mohan, is like a connector development kit that abstracts many of the underlying details and instead provides a set of stable APIs.

“This reduces the complexity and time to build and deploy connectors. We expect that the system integrators will now be able to accelerate development and deployment of connectors, in turn further expanding Databricks’ partner ecosystem,” Mohan said.

Liquid clustering has been introduced to address performance issues around data read and write operations, Databricks said.

In contrast to traditional methods such as Hive-style partitioning that increases data management complexity due to its use of a fixed data layout to improve read and write performance, liquid clustering offers a flexible data layout format that Databricks claims will provide cost-efficient clustering as data increases in size.

Join the newsletter!

<!– The premier provider of daily news to the IT channel, covering business, technology, products, and services. –>

Error: Please check your email address.

Article originally posted on InfoQ. Visit InfoQ

Microsoft recently announced that the Azure Event Hubs schema registry now includes JSON schema support, providing Kafka applications with a centralized repository for schema documents used in messaging-centric and event-driven applications. The JSON schema support is currently in public preview.

Azure Event Hubs is a cloud-based service that enables the ingestion, storage, and processing of large-scale event streams from various sources for real-time analytics and data integration. Its schema registry feature provides users a repository to use and manage schemas in schema-driven event streaming scenarios. By using Azure Schema Registry, both the producer and consumer applications can seamlessly exchange data without the need to handle and distribute the schema.

The company further expands the capabilities of Azure Schema Registry in Event Hubs by adding support for JSON schemas to enable schema-driven event streaming. Kasun Indrasiri, a senior product manager of Azure Messaging at Microsoft, explains in a Tech Community blog post the rationale for bringing JSON support to Event Hubs Schema Registry:

JSON Schema is used to define and validate the structure of JSON data. It helps ensure consistency, completeness, and accuracy of data by providing a clear definition of the expected format. By incorporating JSON Schema validation into the event streaming applications, developers can ensure that any data being produced or consumed adheres to the predefined schema. This helps to prevent issues such as missing fields, incorrect data types, and inconsistent data formats.

In client-side schema validation use cases, developers can use Azure Event Hubs schema registry for client application event serialization and de-serialization. In the case of Kafka applications, a Kafka producer application utilizes the JSON schema stored in Azure Schema Registry to serialize events, which are then published to a Kafka topic/event hub within Azure Event Hubs. At the same time, the Kafka consumer retrieves the JSON schema from Azure Schema Registry using the schema ID of the event to deserialize the consumed events from Event Hubs.

Source: https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/event-hubs/schema-registry-json-schema-kafka

Developers can use JSON Schema by creating a new schema group in Azure Event Hubs Schema Registry in Event Hubs and use JSON Schema as the schema format. Subsequently, they can create the JSON Schemas for schema validation under that schema group.

Like Azure Event Hubs schema registry, Apache Kafka, a distributed streaming platform, has a schema registry called Confluent Schema Registry allows users to define and manage schemas for their events, ensuring data compatibility and consistency. Another example is Amazon Managed Streaming for Apache Kafka (Amazon MSK). This fully managed service runs Apache Kafka on the AWS platform, which allows using third-party tools like Confluent Schema Registry or the AWS Glue Schema Registry to manage schemas. And finally, the Google Cloud Pub/Sub messaging service offers schema management using Google Cloud’s Schema Registry.

Jesse Squire, an engineer working on the Azure SDKs at Microsoft, noted some benefits for JSON Schema support in Azure Event Hubs Schema Registry like:

• Contributes to the Kafka interoperability story for Event Hubs, focusing on cross-product producing and consuming scenarios.
• Enables a consistent developer experience with Schema Registry across different schema formats, reducing support costs and special-case documentation needs.

Lastly, more details on Azure Event Hubs can be found on the documentation landing page. In addition, pricing and availability are available on the pricing page.

Posted on mongodb google news. Visit mongodb google news

MongoDB (NASDAQ:MDB – Free Report) had its target price boosted by Tigress Financial from $365.00 to $490.00 in a research note published on Wednesday morning, The Fly reports.

A number of other equities research analysts have also issued reports on MDB. The Goldman Sachs Group lifted their target price on shares of MongoDB from $420.00 to $440.00 in a research note on Friday, June 23rd. Oppenheimer lifted their price objective on shares of MongoDB from $270.00 to $430.00 in a research note on Friday, June 2nd. Barclays lifted their price objective on shares of MongoDB from $374.00 to $421.00 in a research note on Monday. Truist Financial lifted their price objective on shares of MongoDB from $365.00 to $420.00 in a research note on Friday, June 23rd. Finally, Stifel Nicolaus lifted their price objective on shares of MongoDB from $375.00 to $420.00 in a research note on Friday, June 23rd. One analyst has rated the stock with a sell rating, three have given a hold rating and twenty-one have issued a buy rating to the stock. Based on data from MarketBeat, the company presently has a consensus rating of Moderate Buy and a consensus target price of $358.96.

MongoDB Trading Up 2.5 %

Shares of NASDAQ:MDB opened at $398.02 on Wednesday. The firm has a fifty day moving average of $305.26 and a two-hundred day moving average of $243.01. The firm has a market capitalization of $27.88 billion, a P/E ratio of -85.23 and a beta of 1.04. MongoDB has a 12-month low of $135.15 and a 12-month high of $414.48. The company has a quick ratio of 4.19, a current ratio of 4.19 and a debt-to-equity ratio of 1.44.

MongoDB (NASDAQ:MDB – Free Report) last issued its earnings results on Thursday, June 1st. The company reported $0.56 earnings per share (EPS) for the quarter, beating analysts’ consensus estimates of $0.18 by $0.38. The company had revenue of $368.28 million during the quarter, compared to analyst estimates of $347.77 million. MongoDB had a negative net margin of 23.58% and a negative return on equity of 43.25%. The company’s revenue for the quarter was up 29.0% on a year-over-year basis. During the same quarter last year, the business posted ($1.15) EPS. On average, equities analysts expect that MongoDB will post -2.85 EPS for the current fiscal year.

Insider Transactions at MongoDB

In related news, Director Hope F. Cochran sold 1,175 shares of the company’s stock in a transaction dated Monday, April 3rd. The shares were sold at an average price of $228.33, for a total value of $268,287.75. Following the sale, the director now owns 9,437 shares of the company’s stock, valued at $2,154,750.21. The transaction was disclosed in a legal filing with the SEC, which is accessible through this hyperlink. In related news, CRO Cedric Pech sold 720 shares of the company’s stock in a transaction dated Monday, April 3rd. The shares were sold at an average price of $228.33, for a total value of $164,397.60. Following the sale, the executive now owns 53,050 shares of the company’s stock, valued at $12,112,906.50. The transaction was disclosed in a legal filing with the SEC, which is accessible through this hyperlink. Also, Director Hope F. Cochran sold 1,175 shares of the company’s stock in a transaction dated Monday, April 3rd. The shares were sold at an average price of $228.33, for a total transaction of $268,287.75. Following the completion of the sale, the director now directly owns 9,437 shares in the company, valued at approximately $2,154,750.21. The disclosure for this sale can be found here. In the last 90 days, insiders have sold 108,856 shares of company stock worth $27,327,511. 4.80% of the stock is currently owned by company insiders.

Institutional Trading of MongoDB

Large investors have recently added to or reduced their stakes in the company. Cherry Creek Investment Advisors Inc. boosted its stake in MongoDB by 1.5% in the fourth quarter. Cherry Creek Investment Advisors Inc. now owns 3,283 shares of the company’s stock valued at $646,000 after acquiring an additional 50 shares during the last quarter. CWM LLC boosted its stake in MongoDB by 2.4% in the first quarter. CWM LLC now owns 2,235 shares of the company’s stock valued at $521,000 after acquiring an additional 52 shares during the last quarter. First Horizon Advisors Inc. boosted its position in shares of MongoDB by 29.5% during the first quarter. First Horizon Advisors Inc. now owns 228 shares of the company’s stock worth $53,000 after purchasing an additional 52 shares in the last quarter. Allworth Financial LP boosted its position in shares of MongoDB by 12.9% during the fourth quarter. Allworth Financial LP now owns 508 shares of the company’s stock worth $100,000 after purchasing an additional 58 shares in the last quarter. Finally, Bleakley Financial Group LLC boosted its position in shares of MongoDB by 5.3% during the first quarter. Bleakley Financial Group LLC now owns 1,144 shares of the company’s stock worth $267,000 after purchasing an additional 58 shares in the last quarter. 89.22% of the stock is owned by institutional investors.

About MongoDB

(Free Report)

MongoDB, Inc provides general purpose database platform worldwide. The company offers MongoDB Atlas, a hosted multi-cloud database-as-a-service solution; MongoDB Enterprise Advanced, a commercial database server for enterprise customers to run in the cloud, on-premise, or in a hybrid environment; and Community Server, a free-to-download version of its database, which includes the functionality that developers need to get started with MongoDB.

Featured Stories

Receive News & Ratings for MongoDB Daily – Enter your email address below to receive a concise daily summary of the latest news and analysts’ ratings for MongoDB and related companies with MarketBeat.com’s FREE daily email newsletter.

Article originally posted on mongodb google news. Visit mongodb google news

Posted on mongodb google news. Visit mongodb google news

MongoDB, Inc. (NASDAQ:MDB – Free Report) was the recipient of some unusual options trading on Wednesday. Stock traders acquired 36,130 call options on the company. This is an increase of 2,077% compared to the average daily volume of 1,660 call options.

Insider Activity at MongoDB

In other news, CAO Thomas Bull sold 605 shares of the business’s stock in a transaction on Monday, April 3rd. The stock was sold at an average price of $228.34, for a total transaction of $138,145.70. Following the completion of the sale, the chief accounting officer now owns 17,706 shares in the company, valued at $4,042,988.04. The transaction was disclosed in a filing with the SEC, which is available at this hyperlink. In related news, Director Hope F. Cochran sold 1,175 shares of the company’s stock in a transaction dated Monday, April 3rd. The stock was sold at an average price of $228.33, for a total value of $268,287.75. Following the completion of the sale, the director now owns 9,437 shares in the company, valued at $2,154,750.21. The transaction was disclosed in a filing with the Securities & Exchange Commission, which is available at the SEC website. Also, CAO Thomas Bull sold 605 shares of the company’s stock in a transaction dated Monday, April 3rd. The shares were sold at an average price of $228.34, for a total value of $138,145.70. Following the completion of the sale, the chief accounting officer now owns 17,706 shares of the company’s stock, valued at approximately $4,042,988.04. The disclosure for this sale can be found here. Insiders sold 108,856 shares of company stock valued at $27,327,511 in the last three months. Corporate insiders own 4.80% of the company’s stock.

Institutional Investors Weigh In On MongoDB

A number of large investors have recently added to or reduced their stakes in the stock. Bessemer Group Inc. acquired a new stake in shares of MongoDB in the 4th quarter valued at $29,000. BI Asset Management Fondsmaeglerselskab A S acquired a new stake in shares of MongoDB during the 4th quarter valued at $30,000. Global Retirement Partners LLC boosted its holdings in shares of MongoDB by 346.7% during the 1st quarter. Global Retirement Partners LLC now owns 134 shares of the company’s stock valued at $30,000 after acquiring an additional 104 shares in the last quarter. Lindbrook Capital LLC boosted its holdings in shares of MongoDB by 350.0% during the 4th quarter. Lindbrook Capital LLC now owns 171 shares of the company’s stock valued at $34,000 after acquiring an additional 133 shares in the last quarter. Finally, Y.D. More Investments Ltd bought a new position in MongoDB during the 4th quarter worth $36,000. Institutional investors and hedge funds own 89.22% of the company’s stock.

MongoDB Price Performance

Shares of NASDAQ MDB opened at $398.02 on Thursday. The firm has a market cap of $27.88 billion, a P/E ratio of -85.23 and a beta of 1.04. The company has a current ratio of 4.19, a quick ratio of 4.19 and a debt-to-equity ratio of 1.44. MongoDB has a 1-year low of $135.15 and a 1-year high of $414.48. The business’s 50 day moving average is $305.26 and its 200-day moving average is $243.01.

MongoDB (NASDAQ:MDB – Free Report) last issued its quarterly earnings results on Thursday, June 1st. The company reported $0.56 earnings per share (EPS) for the quarter, topping analysts’ consensus estimates of $0.18 by $0.38. The business had revenue of $368.28 million for the quarter, compared to the consensus estimate of $347.77 million. MongoDB had a negative return on equity of 43.25% and a negative net margin of 23.58%. The firm’s quarterly revenue was up 29.0% compared to the same quarter last year. During the same quarter in the prior year, the business posted ($1.15) earnings per share. Equities research analysts predict that MongoDB will post -2.85 earnings per share for the current year.

Analyst Upgrades and Downgrades

A number of research firms have issued reports on MDB. Royal Bank of Canada boosted their target price on MongoDB from $400.00 to $445.00 in a research note on Friday, June 23rd. Oppenheimer boosted their target price on MongoDB from $270.00 to $430.00 in a research note on Friday, June 2nd. The Goldman Sachs Group boosted their target price on MongoDB from $420.00 to $440.00 in a research note on Friday, June 23rd. Tigress Financial boosted their target price on MongoDB from $365.00 to $490.00 in a research note on Wednesday. Finally, Morgan Stanley upped their price objective on MongoDB from $270.00 to $440.00 in a research report on Friday, June 23rd. One investment analyst has rated the stock with a sell rating, three have assigned a hold rating and twenty-one have issued a buy rating to the stock. According to data from MarketBeat, MongoDB presently has an average rating of “Moderate Buy” and a consensus target price of $358.96.

MongoDB Company Profile

(Free Report)

MongoDB, Inc provides general purpose database platform worldwide. The company offers MongoDB Atlas, a hosted multi-cloud database-as-a-service solution; MongoDB Enterprise Advanced, a commercial database server for enterprise customers to run in the cloud, on-premise, or in a hybrid environment; and Community Server, a free-to-download version of its database, which includes the functionality that developers need to get started with MongoDB.

Recommended Stories

Receive News & Ratings for MongoDB Daily – Enter your email address below to receive a concise daily summary of the latest news and analysts’ ratings for MongoDB and related companies with MarketBeat.com’s FREE daily email newsletter.

Article originally posted on mongodb google news. Visit mongodb google news

Posted on nosqlgooglealerts. Visit nosqlgooglealerts

Introduction:

The New Report By Precision Reports Titled, ‘Global “NoSQL Database Market” Size, Share, Price, Trends,Report and Forecast 2023-2029’, gives an in-depth analysis of the global NoSQL Database market, assessing the market based on its segments like fraction, application, end-use, and major regions.The NoSQL Database Market Report Contains 102 pages Including Full TOC, Tables and Figures, and Chart with In-depth Analysis Pre and Post COVID-19 Market Outbreak Impact Analysis and Situation by Region.

Who is the largest manufacturers of NoSQL Database Market worldwide?

• Oracle
• Microsoft Corporation
• InfiniteGraph
• Hypertable Inc.
• Neo technology Inc.
• DynamoDB
• MapR Technologies, Inc.
• Skyll
• Oracle Corporation
• MarkLogic Corporation
• The Apache Software Foundation
• Basho Technologies
• ObjectLabs Corporation
• Aerospike Inc.
• IBM Corporation
• Couchbase
• Cisco Systems Inc.
• Objectivity Inc.

Get a Sample PDF of report –https://www.precisionreports.co/enquiry/request-sample/20142927

Short Description About NoSQL Database Market:

The Global NoSQL Database market is anticipated to rise at a considerable rate during the forecast period, between 2022 and 2029. In 2021, the market is growing at a steady rate and with the rising adoption of strategies by key players, the market is expected to rise over the projected horizon.

North America, especially The United States, will still play an important role which cannot be ignored. Any changes from United States might affect the development trend of NoSQL Database. The market in North America is expected to grow considerably during the forecast period. The high adoption of advanced technology and the presence of large players in this region are likely to create ample growth opportunities for the market.

Europe also play important roles in global market, with a magnificent growth in CAGR During the Forecast period 2022-2029.

NoSQL Database Market size is projected to reach Multimillion USD by 2029, In comparison to 2022, at unexpected CAGR during 2022-2029.

Despite the presence of intense competition, due to the global recovery trend is clear, investors are still optimistic about this area, and it will still be more new investments entering the field in the future.

This report focuses on the NoSQL Database in global market, especially in North America, Europe and Asia-Pacific, South America, Middle East and Africa. This report categorizes the market based on manufacturers, regions, type and application.

The report focuses on the NoSQL Database market size, segment size (mainly covering product type, application, and geography), competitor landscape, recent status, and development trends. Furthermore, the report provides detailed cost analysis, supply chain.

Technological innovation and advancement will further optimize the performance of the product, making it more widely used in downstream applications. Moreover, Consumer behavior analysis and market dynamics (drivers, restraints, opportunities) provides crucial information for knowing the NoSQL Database market.

Get a Sample Copy of the NoSQL Database Report 2023

What are the factors driving the growth of the NoSQL Database Market?

Growing demand for below applications around the world has had a direct impact on the growth of the NoSQL Database

• E-Commerce
• Social Networking
• Data Analytics
• Web Applications
• Mobile Applications

What are the types of NoSQL Database available in the Market?

Based on Product Types the Market is categorized into Below types that held the largest NoSQL Database market share In 2022.

• Key-Value Store
• Document Database
• Column-Based Store
• Graph Database

Which regions are leading the NoSQL Database Market?

• North America (United States, Canada and Mexico)
• Europe (Germany, UK, France, Italy, Russia and Turkey etc.)
• Asia-Pacific (China, Japan, Korea, India, Australia, Indonesia, Thailand, Philippines, Malaysia and Vietnam)
• South America (Brazil, Argentina, Columbia etc.)
• Middle East and Africa (Saudi Arabia, UAE, Egypt, Nigeria and South Africa)

Inquire more and share questions if any before the purchase on this report at –https://www.precisionreports.co/enquiry/pre-order-enquiry/20142927

This NoSQL Database Market Research/Analysis Report Contains Answers to your following Questions

• What are the global trends in the NoSQL Database market? Would the market witness an increase or decline in the demand in the coming years?
• What is the estimated demand for different types of products in NoSQL Database? What are the upcoming industry applications and trends for NoSQL Database market?
• What Are Projections of Global NoSQL Database Industry Considering Capacity, Production and Production Value? What Will Be the Estimation of Cost and Profit? What Will Be Market Share, Supply and Consumption? What about Import and Export?
• Where will the strategic developments take the industry in the mid to long-term?
• What are the factors contributing to the final price of NoSQL Database? What are the raw materials used for NoSQL Database manufacturing?
• How big is the opportunity for the NoSQL Database market? How will the increasing adoption of NoSQL Database for mining impact the growth rate of the overall market?
• How much is the global NoSQL Database market worth? What was the value of the market In 2020?
• Who are the major players operating in the NoSQL Database market? Which companies are the front runners?
• Which are the recent industry trends that can be implemented to generate additional revenue streams?
• What Should Be Entry Strategies, Countermeasures to Economic Impact, and Marketing Channels for NoSQL Database Industry?

NoSQL Database Market – Covid-19 Impact and Recovery Analysis:

We were monitoring the direct impact of covid-19 in this market, further to the indirect impact from different industries. This document analyzes the effect of the pandemic on the NoSQL Database market from a international and nearby angle. The document outlines the marketplace size, marketplace traits, and market increase for NoSQL Database industry, categorised with the aid of using kind, utility, and patron sector. Further, it provides a complete evaluation of additives concerned in marketplace improvement in advance than and after the covid-19 pandemic. Report moreover done a pestel evaluation within the business enterprise to study key influencers and boundaries to entry.

Our studies analysts will assist you to get custom designed info to your report, which may be changed in phrases of a particular region, utility or any statistical info. In addition, we’re constantly inclined to conform with the study, which triangulated together along with your very own statistics to make the marketplace studies extra complete for your perspective.

Final Report will add the analysis of the impact of Russia-Ukraine War and COVID-19 on this NoSQL Database Industry.

TO KNOW HOW COVID-19 PANDEMIC AND RUSSIA UKRAINE WAR WILL IMPACT THIS MARKET – REQUEST SAMPLE

Detailed TOC of Global NoSQL Database Market Research Report, 2023-2030

1 Market Overview
1.1 Product Overview and Scope of NoSQL Database
1.2 Classification of NoSQL Database by Type
1.2.1 Overview: Global NoSQL Database Market Size by Type: 2017 Versus 2021 Versus 2030
1.2.2 Global NoSQL Database Revenue Market Share by Type in 2021
1.3 Global NoSQL Database Market by Application
1.3.1 Overview: Global NoSQL Database Market Size by Application: 2017 Versus 2021 Versus 2030
1.4 Global NoSQL Database Market Size and Forecast
1.5 Global NoSQL Database Market Size and Forecast by Region
1.6 Market Drivers, Restraints and Trends
1.6.1 NoSQL Database Market Drivers
1.6.2 NoSQL Database Market Restraints
1.6.3 NoSQL Database Trends Analysis

2 Company Profiles
2.1 Company
2.1.1 Company Details
2.1.2 Company Major Business
2.1.3 Company NoSQL Database Product and Solutions
2.1.4 Company NoSQL Database Revenue, Gross Margin and Market Share (2019, 2020, 2021 and 2023)
2.1.5 Company Recent Developments and Future Plans

3 Market Competition, by Players
3.1 Global NoSQL Database Revenue and Share by Players (2019,2020,2021, and 2023)
3.2 Market Concentration Rate
3.2.1 Top3 NoSQL Database Players Market Share in 2021
3.2.2 Top 10 NoSQL Database Players Market Share in 2021
3.2.3 Market Competition Trend
3.3 NoSQL Database Players Head Office, Products and Services Provided
3.4 NoSQL Database Mergers and Acquisitions
3.5 NoSQL Database New Entrants and Expansion Plans

4 Market Size Segment by Type
4.1 Global NoSQL Database Revenue and Market Share by Type (2017-2023)
4.2 Global NoSQL Database Market Forecast by Type (2023-2030)

5 Market Size Segment by Application
5.1 Global NoSQL Database Revenue Market Share by Application (2017-2023)
5.2 Global NoSQL Database Market Forecast by Application (2023-2030)

6 Regions by Country, by Type, and by Application
6.1 NoSQL Database Revenue by Type (2017-2030)
6.2 NoSQL Database Revenue by Application (2017-2030)
6.3 NoSQL Database Market Size by Country
6.3.1 NoSQL Database Revenue by Country (2017-2030)
6.3.2 United States NoSQL Database Market Size and Forecast (2017-2030)
6.3.3 Canada NoSQL Database Market Size and Forecast (2017-2030)
6.3.4 Mexico NoSQL Database Market Size and Forecast (2017-2030)

7 Research Findings and Conclusion

8 Appendix
8.1 Methodology
8.2 Research Process and Data Source
8.3 Disclaimer

9 Research Methodology

10 Conclusion

Continued….

Purchase this report (Price 2980 USD for a single-user license) –https://www.precisionreports.co/purchase/20142927

About Us:

Precision Reports is the credible source for gaining the market reports that will provide you with the lead your business needs. At Precision Reports, our objective is providing a platform for many top-notch market research firms worldwide to publish their research reports, as well as helping the decision makers in finding most suitable market research solutions under one roof. Our aim is to provide the best solution that matches the exact customer requirements. This drives us to provide you with custom or syndicated research reports.

Posted on mongodb google news. Visit mongodb google news

Oracle and Ampere Computing held an event today to talk about Ampere’s role at Oracle, in Oracle’s cloud business, and in support of Oracle’s enterprise Oracle Database. Larry Ellison, Oracle’s founder and chief executive, was in attendance, offering what seems like bad news for Intel.

Mr. Ellison reportedly said at the event that “this year, Oracle will buy GPUs and CPUs from three companies.” He continued, saying that Oracle “will buy GPUs from Nvidia, and we’re buying billions of dollars of those. We will spend three times that on CPUs from Ampere and AMD.”

Today’s announcement goes beyond Oracle Database simply gaining support for a new processor architecture. The news acknowledges Ampere’s credibility, will contribute to Ampere’s growing momentum, and will play directly into Oracle’s successful cloud strategy.

Oracle Database Supports Ampere Altra

Oracle announced today that the company will support Oracle Database 19C (the latest long-term support release of Oracle Database) running on Ampere Altra processors. Oracle will support the processor on Oracle’s Oracle Cloud Infrastructure (OCI) and on on-prem Ampere-based servers.

Outside the public cloud, there are only a few options for buying an Ampere-based server. Hewlett Packard Enterprise and Lenovo are the only tier-one OEMs shipping Ampere servers, while Supermicro and a handful of smaller server builders also have offerings. There has yet to be an official word on whether Oracle will support Ampere processors on competing cloud services, where Ampere has configurations in every top cloud vendor except Amazon.

Ampere’s (and ARM’s) Cloud Momentum

Larry Ellison said at the event, “it’s a major commitment to move to a new supplier. We’ve moved to a new architecture, and we’ve moved to new supplier.” He said, “we think that this is the future. The old Intel X86 architecture, after many decades in the market, is reaching its limit.”

I disagree with Mr. Ellison that the x86 architecture is reaching its limit, but alternative architectures, such as ARM’s, are proving to be a better value than x86 across multiple essential scenarios. One of these is economic. ARM-based processors cost less, both to procure and to operate. It’s even cheaper to run Oracle Database on one, as Oracle’s per-core licensing is more attractive on single-threaded cores (AMD and Intel server processors have multi-threaded cores).

Ampere’s ARM-based processors arrive with a massive core count and impressive single-threaded performance. The performance is delivered with better power and thermal profile than competing x86-based processors. This makes Ampere’s parts more energy efficient, critical in today’s sustainability-driven environment, but also enables a tremendous per-rack core density. All of this makes the processors attractive to hyper-scalers and public cloud providers.

Cloud service providers are on the Ampere bandwagon. Besides Oracle’s OCI, Ampere processors are found in Microsoft Azure, Google Cloud Infrastructure, Alibaba Cloud, and Tencent Cloud. The company’s presence across CSPs is growing. The number of Ampere-based configurations across the mentioned CSPs has grown 297% over the past twelve months, while the total number of configurations across all processor vendors only grew by 23%.

Ampere isn’t alone in the cloud market. Amazon was the first to bring the ARM architecture into the public cloud space with its Graviton processor, now in its third generation. Alibaba, which does use Ampere processors in its instances, has started rolling out instance types based on its own Yitian server processor. While there have been persistent rumors for years that Microsoft is building its ARM-based server part for Azure, Microsoft maintains the highest number of Ampere configurations across all CSPs.

Oracle’s Cloud Momentum

It’s hard to talk about today’s announcement without talking about Oracle’s momentum in the public cloud. In an environment where the global public cloud market grew about 20% year-over-year in Q1 2023, Oracle grew its OCI business by more than 50% year-over-year. Oracle Cloud is the number four cloud vendor in North America, and it’s climbing the charts with a bullet.

Much of Oracle’s increasing cloud success is found in its matter-of-fact strategy. While competing CSPs create a menu of offerings longer than a Cheesecake Factory menu, Oracle focuses on what’s essential for its enterprise customers. Where AWS has dozens of instance types, Oracle has barely a dozen in total. Ampere plays prominently in those configurations.

The sensibility applies to its infrastructure as well. Returning to Larry Ellison, he told a group of analysts (including me) earlier this year that OCI was about efficiency. Every region is identical, making deployment a cookie-cutter operation, enabling management to automated. That approach minimizes operational costs, some of which Oracle passes back to its users with some of the lowest cloud pricing among the top CSPs.

Analyst’s Take

Oracle’s support for the Ampere processor on its flagship enterprise database is a vote of confidence for the architecture. Even though Oracle is an investor in Ampere, the company wouldn’t have made this move if it didn’t make technical sense. Whatever you believe about Oracle, you should know that it takes its engineering seriously.

ARM is growing in the public cloud space, where its energy efficiency and cloud-native architecture make it a natural fit. ARM’s growth in the cloud is measured primary through the growth of Ampere, which continues to land in new configurations across nearly every cloud vendor. Oracle’s support of the Ampere Altra processor on the world’s most dominant relational database will only scale Ampere’s business even further. Oracle said today that Ampere is enterprise ready. That’s huge.

Disclosure: Steve McDowell is an industry analyst, and NAND Research an industry analyst firm, that engages in, or has engaged in, research, analysis, and advisory services with many technology companies, which may include those mentioned in this article. Mr. McDowell does not hold any equity positions with any company mentioned in this article.

Article originally posted on mongodb google news. Visit mongodb google news

Posted on mongodb google news. Visit mongodb google news

© 2023 Benzinga.com. Benzinga does not provide investment advice. All rights reserved.

Article originally posted on mongodb google news. Visit mongodb google news

Posted on mongodb google news. Visit mongodb google news

June 27, 2023 – The Stanley Laman Group Ltd. recently reported a cut in its stake in MongoDB, Inc. by 16.5% during the first quarter of the year, as per its recent Form 13F filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). The institutional investor was previously holding onto 28,076 shares of the company’s stock which it reduced to 22,510 shares after selling off almost 5,566 shares earlier this year.

MongoDB, Inc is a well-known universal database platform that provides services worldwide. The organization’s offerings include MongoDB Atlas – which is a multi-cloud database-as-a-service hosting solution; MongoDB Enterprise Advanced – a commercial database server for enterprise customers looking to run their operations in hybrid cloud environments; and Community Server – a free-to-download version of the platform that comes loaded with all the necessary functionalities required by developers to get started with MongoDB.

As per the latest revealed statistics from MDB’s financial reports dating back to June 27th, their one year low stands at $135.15 and one year high is $398.89 while shares of MDB opened at $379.98 on Tuesday. Currently possessing $26.61 billion market capitalization, the company has reported price-to-earnings ratio of negative 81.37 along with a beta value of 1.04 and debt-to-equity ratio settling at moderate levels of about 1.44.

Through this sale, it will be interesting to observe how MDB progresses with keeping up or improving their existing services without encountering any apparent setbacks despite losing an integral portion of investment from one of their key investors such as Stanley Laman Group Ltd. Whether they look towards other sources for raising funds or opt for new strategies- whatever decision they make will ultimately impact their market standing in diverse ways thereby altering investor sentiment going forward.

In conclusion, this event underlines the significant role played by institutional investors in helping enterprises remain financially stable. While it may seem like a mere sale of shares at surface level, the implications of such selling are bound to have an impact on all parties surrounding the matter in question and it will be interesting to observe how MDB navigates through this new phase with respect to its competitors and market demands going forward.

MongoDB: Revolutionizing General Purpose Database with Innovation and Security

---

MongoDB: The Powerhouse in General Purpose Database Platform

MongoDB, Inc is a global provider of general purpose database platform that offers multi-cloud database-as-a-service solution, commercial database server for enterprise clients, and a free-to-use version of its database. MongoDB has recently announced that several institutional investors have either added to or reduced their stakes in the stock. Allworth Financial LP and Janney Montgomery Scott LLC increased their holdings by 12.9% and 4.5%, respectively, while Robert W. Baird and Goldman Sachs Group raised their price objectives on the stock from $390 to $430 and from $420 to $440, respectively.

Credit Suisse Group dropped its price objective on shares of MongoDB from $305 to $250 but maintained an “outperform” rating on the stock in a report released on March 10th. Meanwhile, JMP Securities increased its target price on shares of MongoDB from $245 to $370, whereas Stifel Nicolaus increased it from $375 to $420 in a research report released last June.

The company reported revenue of $368.28 million during the quarter compared to analysts’ estimates of $347.77 million – up 29% compared to the same quarter last year.

On average, equities research analysts expect that MongoDB will post -$2.85 earnings per share for the current year while maintaining credibility with a consensus rating of “Moderate Buy.”

In other news, insiders sold about 108,856 shares amounting to over $27 million worth of company stocks over the past three months at an average selling price ranging between$228-$229 per share.

Despite this activity among institutional investors and stocks sales by insiders, MongoDB remains one of the most favored companies providing general purpose databases around the world. With their constant innovative approach to solving customer issues through products such as Atlas garnered with top-notch industry-standard security features made it stand out among other competitors in the industry.

Article originally posted on mongodb google news. Visit mongodb google news