Apache CouchDB vs. Neo4j

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
Neo4j
Score 8.7 out of 10
N/A
Neo4j is an open source embeddable graph database developed by Neo Technologies based in San Mateo, California with an office in Sweden.
$65
per month
Pricing
Apache CouchDBNeo4j
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
Aura Professional
$65
per month
Community Edition
Free
Enterprise Edition
Contact Sales
Aura Free
Free
Aura Enterprise
Contact Sales
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
CouchDBNeo4j
Free Trial
NoYes
Free/Freemium Version
NoYes
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup fee
Additional Details——
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Apache CouchDBNeo4j
Considered Both Products
CouchDB
Chose Apache CouchDB
Open Source, and freely able to install it on any OS you desire (the big 3, anyways) CouchDB was selected for that, it's early-adoption of JSON and its mobile-friendly environment. Also, I have used it off and on in various non-professional projects, and it was really one of …
Neo4j

No answer on this topic

Top Pros
Top Cons
Features
Apache CouchDBNeo4j
NoSQL Databases
Comparison of NoSQL Databases features of Product A and Product B
Apache CouchDB
7.9
2 Ratings
11% below category average
Neo4j
-
Ratings
Performance8.02 Ratings00 Ratings
Availability8.52 Ratings00 Ratings
Concurrency8.52 Ratings00 Ratings
Security6.02 Ratings00 Ratings
Scalability8.02 Ratings00 Ratings
Data model flexibility7.02 Ratings00 Ratings
Deployment model flexibility9.02 Ratings00 Ratings
Best Alternatives
Apache CouchDBNeo4j
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 CouchDBNeo4j
Likelihood to Recommend
9.0
(10 ratings)
2.1
(9 ratings)
Likelihood to Renew
9.0
(9 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Usability
8.0
(1 ratings)
6.0
(1 ratings)
Implementation Rating
9.0
(1 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
User Testimonials
Apache CouchDBNeo4j
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
Neo Technologies
Neo4J is great for creating network graphs or illustrating how things are related. It is also good for finding individuals or things that have greater influence than others in a system. It is not appropriate if you have standard data sets that can be analyzed using conventional methods or visualized using Tableau, for example.
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
Neo Technologies
  • Mature Query language, I found Cypher QL to be mature in handling all sorts of problems we throw at it. Its expressive enough to be intuitive while providing rich features for various scenarios.
  • Native support for REST API, that makes interacting with Neo4J intuitive and easy.
  • Support for Procedures in Java, procedures are custom code that could be added to the Neo4J to write custom querying of data. The best part about the procedures is it could be invoked using the REST API. This allows us to overcome any shortcomings from their Cypher query language.
  • Nice UI and interface for executing the Query and visualizing the response.
  • UI access controlled by User credentials allows for neat access controls.
  • Awesome free community edition for small-scale projects.
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
Neo Technologies
  • One of the hardest challenges that Neo4j had to solve was the horizontal scaling problem. I am not updated on recent developments, but at the time of my use, I couldn't find a viable solution.
  • Neo4j does not play with other open source APIs like Blueprint. You have to use the native Neo4j API.
  • There wasn't a visual tool to see your data. Of course, third party tools are always available, but I would have loved something which came with the Neo4j bundle. I love that Docker comes bundled with Kitematic, so it's not wrong to hope that Neo4j could also ship with some default visualization software.
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
Neo Technologies
No answers on this topic
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
Neo Technologies
[Based on] Query Language, Performance on small and large data sets, integration and deployment, analysis, API support, Interactive UI.
Read full review
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
Neo Technologies
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
Neo Technologies
Neo4j is a graph store and has different use cases compared to another NoSQL Document store like MongoDB. MongoDB is a bad choice when joins are common as existing operators for joining two documents (similar to tables in a relational store) as Mongo 3.5 use SQL like join algorithms which are expensive. MongoDB is a great choice when distributed schemaless rich document structures are important requirements. Cross document transaction support is not native to MongoDB yet, whereas Neo4J is ACID complaint with all its operations.
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
Neo Technologies
  • Positive: Less complex queries on graph structures, than in relational databases.
  • Negative: maintenance is a huge deal, things doesn't work and break, requiring lengthy restore operations.
Read full review
ScreenShots