Couchbase Server vs. Google Cloud BigTable

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

Google Bigtable is ONLY suited for massive data sets which scale PetaBytes and TerraBytes. Anything under this can easily be done via dedicated VMs and open source tools. Google Bigtable is expensive and shall be used wisely. It should be utilised only where it is well suited else you would simply be wasting dollars and not utilizing its full benefits.

Incentivized

• Couchbase performance is exceptional both for in-memory and persisted transactions.
• Handling of node failures and cluster rebalancing (high availability).
• Enterprise support from Couchbase themselves
• Good documentation
• Streaming of bucket (database) level mutations via their Database Change Protocol (DCP).
• Replication of datasets between native clients and Couchbase buckets
• Handling of simultaneous writes to the same record with performance penalties

Incentivized

• Analytics: is at Google's heart. No on can beat Google in this space and BigTable is one of its implementation of this. The insights you gain from BigTable are simply usable in your day to day activities and can help you make real difference.
• Speed: Processing TBs and PBs of data under minutes needs real efficient platform which is capable of doing much more than just processing data. All this data cannot be processed by a single machine, but rather huge pairs of machines working in conjuction with each other. BigTable's implementation is one of the finest and allows you achieve great speeds!
• Interface: is great. Google has segregated required task under logically placed buttons which takes no time by users to understand and get habituated.

Incentivized

• The N1QL engine performs poorly compared to SQL engines due to the number of interactions needed, so if your use case involves the need for a lot of SQL-like query activity as opposed to the direct fetch of data in the form of a key/value map you may want to consider a RDBMS that has support for json data types so that you can more easily mix the use of relational and non-relational approaches to data access.
• You have to be careful when using multiple capabilities (e.g. transactions with Sync Gateway) as you will typically run into problems where one technology may not operate correctly in combination with another.
• There are quality problems with some newly released features, so be careful with being an early adopter unless you really need the capability. We somewhat desperately adopted the use of transactions, but went through multiple bughunt cycles with Couchbase working the kinks out.

Incentivized

• User interface's responsiveness: I understand so much is going on under the hood, but laggyness is acceptable if a workload is running or being processed. In case their is not workload being process, GUI should work blazing fast. I have faced this at times, and this becomes frustrating as well.
• Nothing other than this - BigTable is quite efficient platform and does exactly what it is built for.

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

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.

For big IT firms like us, data is very important and it only holds its value if it can make sense to us. Therefore, Bigtable's usability is priceless when it comes to decision making based on data.

Incentivized

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

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.

Google provides premium support services for BigTable which is absolutely blazing fast similar to Bigtable's performance.

Incentivized

The Apache Cassandra was one type of product used in our company for a couple of use-cases. The Aerospike is something we [analyzed] not so long time ago as an interesting alternative, due to its performance characteristics. The Oracle Coherence was and is still being used for [the] distributed caching use-case, but it will be replaced eventually by Couchbase. Though each of these products [has] its own strengths and weaknesses, we prefer sticking to Couchbase because of [the] experience we have with this product and because it is cost-effective for our organization.

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

• Great performance.
• Leading Couchbase Lite capabilities for mobile use.
• Developers' learning curve with replica reads and multi cluster can be long. Needs guidance and nurturing.
• Cluster maintenance during OS patching, etc. has multiple ways to approach. Operational teams may need some guidance.

Incentivized

• Positive return on investment.

Incentivized