Apache CouchDB vs. Google Cloud Datastore

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
CouchDB
Score 6.1 out of 10
N/A
Apache CouchDB is an HTTP + JSON document database with Map Reduce views and bi-directional replication. The Couch Replication Protocol is implemented in a variety of projects and products that span computing environments from globally distributed server-clusters, over mobile phones to web browsers.N/A
Google Cloud Datastore
Score 8.2 out of 10
N/A
Google Cloud Datastore is a NoSQL "schemaless" database as a service, supporting diverse data types. The database is managed; Google manages sharding and replication and prices according to storage and activity.N/A
Pricing
Apache CouchDBGoogle Cloud Datastore
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
CouchDBGoogle Cloud Datastore
Free Trial
NoNo
Free/Freemium Version
NoNo
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup fee
Additional Details——
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Apache CouchDBGoogle Cloud Datastore
Top Pros
Top Cons
Features
Apache CouchDBGoogle Cloud Datastore
NoSQL Databases
Comparison of NoSQL Databases features of Product A and Product B
Apache CouchDB
7.9
2 Ratings
11% below category average
Google Cloud Datastore
10.0
2 Ratings
13% above category average
Performance8.02 Ratings10.02 Ratings
Availability8.52 Ratings10.02 Ratings
Concurrency8.52 Ratings10.02 Ratings
Security6.02 Ratings10.02 Ratings
Scalability8.02 Ratings10.02 Ratings
Data model flexibility7.02 Ratings10.02 Ratings
Deployment model flexibility9.02 Ratings9.92 Ratings
Best Alternatives
Apache CouchDBGoogle Cloud Datastore
Small Businesses
IBM Cloudant
IBM Cloudant
Score 7.9 out of 10
IBM Cloudant
IBM Cloudant
Score 7.9 out of 10
Medium-sized Companies
IBM Cloudant
IBM Cloudant
Score 7.9 out of 10
IBM Cloudant
IBM Cloudant
Score 7.9 out of 10
Enterprises
IBM Cloudant
IBM Cloudant
Score 7.9 out of 10
IBM Cloudant
IBM Cloudant
Score 7.9 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
Apache CouchDBGoogle Cloud Datastore
Likelihood to Recommend
9.0
(10 ratings)
9.9
(2 ratings)
Likelihood to Renew
9.0
(9 ratings)
10.0
(2 ratings)
Usability
8.0
(1 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Implementation Rating
9.0
(1 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
User Testimonials
Apache CouchDBGoogle Cloud Datastore
Likelihood to Recommend
Apache
Great for REST API development, if you want a small, fast server that will send and receive JSON structures, CouchDB is hard to beat. Not great for enterprise-level relational database querying (no kidding). While by definition, document-oriented databases are not relational, porting or migrating from relational, and using CouchDB as a backend is probably not a wise move as it's reliable, but It may not always be highly available.
Read full review
Google
If you want a serverless NoSQL database, no matter it is for personal use, or for company use, Google Cloud Datastore should be on top of your list, especially if you are using Google Cloud as your primary cloud platform. It integrates with all services in the Google Cloud platform.
Read full review
Pros
Apache
  • It can replicate and sync with web browsers via PouchDB. This lets you keep a synced copy of your database on the client-side, which offers much faster data access than continuous HTTP requests would allow, and enables offline usage.
  • Simple Map/Reduce support. The M/R system lets you process terabytes of documents in parallel, save the results, and only need to reprocess documents that have changed on subsequent updates. While not as powerful as Hadoop, it is an easy to use query system that's hard to screw up.
  • Sharding and Clustering support. As of CouchDB 2.0, it supports clustering and sharding of documents between instances without needing a load balancer to determine where requests should go.
  • Master to Master replication lets you clone, continuously backup, and listen for changes through the replication protocol, even over unreliable WAN links.
Read full review
Google
  • Automatically handles shards and replication.
  • Schema-less & NoSQL.
  • Fully managed.
Read full review
Cons
Apache
  • NoSQL DB can become a challenge for seasoned RDBMS users.
  • The map-reduce paradigm can be very demanding for first-time users.
  • JSON format documents with Key-Value pairs are somewhat verbose and consume more storage.
Read full review
Google
  • It is hosted on GCP, which makes it harder if your company have multi-cloud strategy.
  • When you want to migrate to other cloud providers, there can be a caveat.
Read full review
Likelihood to Renew
Apache
Because our current solution S3 is working great and CouchDB was a nightmare. The worst is that at first, it seemed fine until we filled it with tons of data and then started to create views and actually delete.
Read full review
Google
For the amount of use we're getting from Google Cloud Datastore, switching to any other platform would have more cost with little gain. Not having to manage and maintain Google Cloud Datastore for over 4 years has allowed our teams to work on other things. The price is so low that almost any other option for our needs would be far more expensive in time and money.
Read full review
Usability
Apache
Couchdb is very simple to use and the features are also reduced but well implemented. In order to use it the way its designed, the ui is adequate and easy. Of course, there are some other task that can't be performed through the admin ui but the minimalistic design allows you to use external libraries to develop custom scripts
Read full review
Google
No answers on this topic
Implementation Rating
Apache
it support is minimal also hw requirements. Also for development, we can have databases replicated everywhere and the replication is automagical. once you set up the security and the rules for replication, you are ready to go. The absence of a model let you build your app the way you want it
Read full review
Google
No answers on this topic
Alternatives Considered
Apache
It has been 5+ years since we chose CouchDB. We looked an MongoDB, Cassandra, and probably some others. At the end of the day, the performance, power potential, and simplicity of CouchDB made it a simple choice for our needs. No one should use just because we did. As I said early, make sure you understand your problems, and find the right solution. Some random reading that might be useful: http://www.julianbrowne.com/article/viewer/brewers-cap-theorem https://www.couchbase.com/nosql-resources/why-nosql\ https://www.infoq.com/articles/cap-twelve-years-later-how-the-rules-have-changed
Read full review
Google
We selected Google Cloud Datastore as one of our candidates for our NoSQL data is because it is provided by Google Cloud, which fits our needs. Most of our infrastructure is on Google Cloud, so when we think about the NoSQL database, the first thing we thought about is Google Cloud Datastore. And it proves itself.
Read full review
Return on Investment
Apache
  • It has saved us hours and hours of coding.
  • It is has taught us a new way to look at things.
  • It has taught us patience as the first few weeks with CouchDB were not pleasant. It was not easy to pick up like MongoDB.
Read full review
Google
  • Simple billing part of Google Cloud Platform
  • No time spent configuring and maintaining Google Cloud Datastore.
  • Very good uptime for our applications.
Read full review
ScreenShots