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
Oracle Database
Score 8.2 out of 10
N/A
Oracle Database, currently in edition 23ai, is a converged, multimodel database management system. It is designed to simplify development for AI, microservices, graph, document, spatial, and relational applications.
$0.05
per hour
Pricing
Apache CouchDB
Oracle Database
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
Oracle Base Database Service - Standard
$0.0538
per hour
Oracle Base Database Service - Enterprise
$0.1075
per hour
Oracle Base Database Service - High Performance
$0.2218
per hour
Standard Edition
Contact Sales
Enterprise Edition
Contact Sales
Personal Edition
Contact Sales
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
CouchDB
Oracle Database
Free Trial
No
Yes
Free/Freemium Version
No
Yes
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
No
No
Entry-level Setup Fee
No setup fee
No setup fee
Additional Details
—
—
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Apache CouchDB
Oracle Database
Considered Both Products
CouchDB
Verified User
Anonymous
Chose 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 …
Compared to MongoDB, CouchDB's Map-Reduce paradigm poses a steeper learning curve for SQL users. However, CouchDB's master-master replication is an advantage of implementing a load-balanced solution. Even though, currently, CouchDB has strong community support, as an open …
MongoDB and CouchDB are both document stores, but their concurrency models and ability to scale are very different. MongoDB cannot replicate / shard over unreliable links and network partitions have been the cause of data loss in the past. MongoDB has an easier query language …
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 …
S3 blew this out of the water, we can get over 30 files a second, almost no failures, auto backed up, don't need our own server, and a much simpler interface with PHP Laravel.
We looked at MongoDB and Firebase. MongoDB gives us the best working db engine with a very intuitive design. However, it does not work as well offline. Firebase was extremely hard to create searching and indexing. Using a third-party to search didn't work for us or at least it …
I have briefly used MongoDB in other products, and it proved that it had better integration capabilities with Ruby on Rails and node.js software platforms, more than CouchDB. But I never had the chance to actually replace CouchDB with MongoDB in the current product to see what …
Oracle stands out among other databases in terms of performance, availability, reliability, and security. It is capable of handling massive loads and heavy OLTP transactions. Oracle database is feature rich and provides various tools for analytics, monitoring and performance …
Because of a rich user base and support for any critical issue, this is one of the best options to choose. In case the project has a TCO issue, it can compromise and choose Postgres as the best alternative. SQL server is also good and easy to code and maintain but performance …
Oracle is placed in a good spot against its competitors. It has advantages over its competitors in its legacy stability and high availability. A common engine to handle relational, JSON, Vector, and graph data makes it more cost-effective. Given all the good features, the …
The Oracle database was selected before I started working on the project, so I can't tell the reasons behind the choice. However, it was recognized as the best suited for holding several million records for related entities and was preferred over NoSQL options.
I have selected Oracle database from other databases as this database is relational database which stored the data in structural and tabular format which is better than any other databases which I have used in my carrier. Also MongoDB is no SQL database where we can use SQL …
Oracle Database is best in business, consistent, and robust. Even the standard version is sufficient for the best performance. The main thing is I have never seen corruption and in my opinion, it is best when used with Linux.
In my opinion, Oracle Database is highly reliable, has better performance with large databases and little to no maintenance once everything is setup. Also, recovery of the Oracle database is much simpler and easier.
Oracle Machine Learning is completely different when compared to HCM or Hyperion. I can say that the data collected from HCM or hyperion enterprise can be used on Oracle Machine Learning to perform an analysis to predict the future business.
Microsoft SQL is just as stable and almost as sellable with a much lower cost of ownership (staff and licensing). But as our primary application doesn't support Microsoft SQL we had to license Oracle.
Oracle Database is among the easiest to integrate with, program against, have a reliable cluster with DR, and has the most understood and well-documented databases. It suits really well if the software shop is primarily Java-based, and deals with large volumes of data with a …
Azure databases is another cloud database that I had used in some .net platform based projects. Both of the cloud database services are identical in nature of usage but very different in scope of usage. But this doesn't mean that the Oracle Database Cloud Service stacks up …
Performance is much better than other RDBMS. Oracle supports better transaction management. It has wide range of features and we don't need to use different types of databases to finish an application requirement.
Most are complements to enhance the benefits of the Oracle database. I selected and evaluated Oracle databases because it is the most used suite in the organization and it is important for me to mention strengths and points to improve.
Sorry this product was not selected by me, but was a legacy install that was upgraded. I see the value in the product, however, I was not involved in the selection process.
Oracle is more of an enterprise-level database than Access and SAP Adaptive Server Enterprise isn't getting developed much (some people wonder how close it is to end of life) but SQL Server is miles ahead of Oracle IMO in terms of user experience and comparable in terms of …
We use SQL Server for other modules of our MLFF Tolling System, so I work on a daily basic with both database engines. Oracle is recognized and distinguished by scalability and performance, ensuring a secure environment to host our critical data that comes from multiple …
We use IBM DB2 in AS400 to handle part of our accounting system and our legacy ERP. We are migrating all functionalities to Oracle Database 12c because it is more secure and stable. We have some applications using SQL Server but we want to handle those systems in it because at …
It's good as a general JSON document store and basic map/reduce system. For more specialized tasks like message queuing, graph traversal, streaming metrics aggregation, or arbitrary table joins, I'd recommend another database.
We migrated from NoSQL to an Oracle database. One of the reasons was robust backup and recovery options available in the Oracle database, which provide zero data loss. A transactional database like Oracle is a better fit for our use case than NoSQL. On a large scale, deployment was evaluated as a cheaper option than the NoSQL engine. This conclusion came even after considering Oracle license is expensive.
As a highly distributed database system, CouchDB naturally has strong high availability with traffic load-balancing capability. It is also easy to scale and replicate data in a cluster for redundancy. However, there is still some room for query performance improvement in the future.
It is very likely to use this 12c (or next version) of Oracle Database. Nothing close to it in the marketplace in terms of performance, reliability and overall database management efficiency. If Oracle did one thing really good - it is it's OLTP Database I must say.
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
Many of the powerful options can be auto-configured but there are still many things to take into account at the moment of installing and configuring an Oracle Database, compared with SQL Server or other databases. At the same time, that extra complexity allows for detailed configuration and guarantees performance, scalability, availability and security.
1. I have very good experience with Oracle Database support team. Oracle support team has pool of talented Oracle Analyst resources in different regions. To name a few regions - EMEA, Asia, USA(EST, MST, PST), Australia. Their support staffs are very supportive, well trained, and customer focused. Whenever I open Oracle Sev1 SR(service request), I always get prompt update on my case timely. 2. Oracle has zoom call and chat session option linked to Oracle SR. Whenever you are in Oracle portal - you can chat with the Oracle Analyst who is working on your case. You can request for Oracle zoom call thru which you can share the your problem server screen in no time. This is very nice as it saves lot of time and energy in case you have to follow up with oracle support for your case. 3.Oracle has excellent knowledge base in which all the customer databases critical problems and their solutions are well documented. It is very easy to follow without consulting to support team at first.
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
Overall the implementation went very well and after that everything came out as expected - in terms of performance and scalability. People should always install and upgrade a stable version for production with the latest patch set updates, test properly as much as possible, and should have a backup plan if anything unexpected happens
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 the first exposure to databases in my career
Because of a rich user base and support for any critical issue, this is one of the best options to choose. In case the project has a TCO issue, it can compromise and choose Postgres as the best alternative. SQL server is also good and easy to code and maintain but performance is not as good as the Oracle
Biggest impact on our business has been that CouchDB has been pretty invisible from a cost or issues perspective. It just works.
We use the Apache releases, so it's free. Of course there is a cost to "free" - we have invested time to become fluent in using and understanding CouchDB. But we feel the investment was well worth the effort and we have a solid, fundamental technology to our products that "just works".
There are some things we do - SaaS vs self-hosting - that have probably been kept simple by using CouchDB. Overall, we are extremely happy with CouchDB.
Our product's ability to monitor the Oracle database has generated significant revenue from only a few customers, totaling $1mn.
An Oracle account helps analyze the patches and changes going into it, enabling the team to enhance the product and update it more quickly. It reduced the effort by more than 50%.
Being a closed-source code DBMS, it is difficult to ascertain the exact exploits of the vulnerability to provide patches to customers and requires reverse engineering.