Aerospike vs. Couchbase

We were developing an advertisement time auction application, where we had to store the client's personal details, advertisement-related details, location, and many other details. Moreover, we required a promotion, cookies, and a few more details from the front end. All this information is heavy in terms of size and cannot be lost if the server crash. So, we required an extremely fast disk database with high scalability and low throughput.

Incentivized

Best suited when edge devices have interrupted internet connection. And Couchbase provides reliable data transfer. If used for attachment Couchbase has a very poor offering. A hard limit of 20 MB is not okay. They have the best conflict resolution but not so great query language on Couchbase lite.

Incentivized

• featured with robustness and reliability
• low hardware resource consumption especially RAM
• open-source
• distributed no-sql server

Incentivized

• Easy to store unstructured data and has great performance
• Managing security is super easy which can be managed across different levels
• UI is pretty simple to use and manage the cluster
• Backup of the data is very easy and the restoration/recovery is fairly easy as well with the in-built tools.
• Easy integration with elasticsearch for replication
• It is fairly easy to scale up or scale down the cluster

Incentivized

• AQL is pretty limited and not as useful as the java client
• Documentation can be lacking for some products
• replication configuration is complicated

Incentivized

• Cluster sizing during the design phase can be improved, especially if the client lacks prior experience. Vendor consultants are very meticulous in order to provide best of class performance and response time, although some more real-world pragmatic approach is often needed.
• Couchbase Lite 2 went thru a major revamp, which broke the compatibility of the applications with some features removed and other changed. That needed development teams working to refactor the applications.

Incentivized

If money isn't an issue, and you're not on the cloud, then I'd go with Aerospike. If you're the cloud ie, aws or azure, then i'd stick with dynamoDB or Cosmos then. Aerospike is definitely not something you want to put into the cloud. It doesn't work well w/ cross regions. If cross DC, you'll have to write some stuff for data integrity checks.

Incentivized

I rarely actually use Couchbase Server, I just stay up-to-date with the features that it provides. However, when the need arises for a NoSQL datastore, then I will strongly consider it as an option

Incentivized

Could be easier to use and install. Also developer experience needs some work

Couchbase has been quite a usable for our implementation. We had similar experience with our previous "trial" implementation, however it was short lived.

Couchbase has so far exceeded expectation. Our implementation team is more confident than ever before.

When we are Live for more than 6 months, I'm hoping to enhance this rating.

One of Couchbase’s greatest assets is its performance with large datasets. Properly set up with well-sized clusters, it is also highly reliable and scalable. User management could be better though, and security often feels like an afterthought. Couchbase has improved tremendously since we started using it, so I am sure that these issues will be ironed out.

Incentivized

We used the community edition.

Incentivized

I haven't had many opportunities to request support, I will look forward to better the rating. We have technical development and integration team who reach out directly to TAM at Couchbase.

Aerospike is much more performant than MongoDB, however there is much greater community adoption and support for mongo

Incentivized

Couchbase could outperform it's competition considerably for database reads and writes. Full text searches were still faster in Elasticsearch but this is more of a feature than a base platform requirement for us.

Incentivized

So far, the way that we mange and upgrade our clusters has be very smooth. It works like a dream when we use it in concert with AWS and their EC2 machines. Having access to powerful instances along side the Couchbase interface is amazing and allows us to do rebalances or maintenance without a worry

Incentivized

• Being able to power the same workload on a fraction of the servers has led to better ROI for my application.
• Less servers needed also meant less time to manage the cluster, leading to savings in engineering time

• There have been several areas of our application [that] really needed an ACID compliant database (e.g. strong transactional guarantees) that we thought we could work around while using Couchbase. [In my opinion] that turned out to be a poor bet. You need to be certain that the specific characteristics of a NoSQL database fit your problem.
• Couchbase does eliminate the need for schema upgrades completely. I.e no downtime or conversion windows as you migrate your data model, adding attributes, etc. This helped with the deployment timeframe associated with DB changes.
• The database is (apparently) a bit more of a space/memory consumer than originally anticipated. During deployments, we received constant pressure from Couchbase consulting teams to eliminate/reduce the number of indexes, and this was because any mutations to docs in a bucket must check for impact against all indexes. More recent years have started to address this with their "collections" features, which helps isolate indexes to specific sub-groupings of documents.

Incentivized