When we were looking into new options to supplement our MSSQL servers, we settled on Mongo. We were aware that Postgres will act as a document store in addition to being a traditional RDBMS, but our decision was largely based on 2 things: We acknowledge that we'll likely never be able to completely eliminate our use of MSSQL. So, if we need an RDBMS, it will still be there. The other main factor was that Mongo makes replication, failover, and sharding a snap, relative to other systems. We don't have a DBA to implement replication for us. So, the simplicity was a huge factor.
There are billion ways to store your data, and they all come with positives and negatives. Postgres can pretty much be everything to everyone, but like any system where that's the case, it can be harder to configure (for me, a developer, anyhow... I'm sure DBAs are laughing at me).