Couchbase Server is a cloud-native, distributed database that fuses the strengths of relational databases such as SQL and ACID transactions with JSON flexibility and scale that defines NoSQL. It is available as a service in commercial clouds and supports hybrid and private cloud deployments.
N/A
PostgreSQL
Score 8.7 out of 10
N/A
PostgreSQL (alternately Postgres) is a free and open source object-relational database system boasting over 30 years of active development, reliability, feature robustness, and performance. It supports SQL and is designed to support various workloads flexibly.
N/A
Redis Software
Score 9.1 out of 10
N/A
Redis is an open source in-memory data structure server and NoSQL database.
The project we are developing with Couchbase, was very inconsistent for few years of the beginning. We had to change data model multiple times. We knew this before starting the project. So we had to choose a NoSQL solution. We also wanted a syncing solution. After some research …
Easy to deploy and manage. Clustering and replication is fairly simple and straightforward. According to developers, Couchbase scored higher points compared to the other products that we evaluated.
We have good experiences with MongoDB, Elasticsearch, and today we expect to be able to improve our products with
Couchbase and in the near future replace 2 products with 1, which will simplify our product architecture.
Couchbase had more features than the other products we evaluated and a more flexible data model. It also has global replication and better performance. Compared to some, it was also easier to deploy, manage, and scale. The global replication, plus the ease of deploying and …
We looked at several different SQL and NoSQL systems. Most were either too expensive, didn't provide the needed functionality, or were too hard to use with the size of our team. We ultimately went with Couchbase because of its performance, horizontal scalability, and price.
For its ease of use I have found it pleasurable. However I have found client/framework support much higher for MongoDB which at times can be frustrating.
We selected CB as it provided the highest performance DB we evaluated while still providing a relatively rich set of additional features at competitive pricing.
I can't speak to the final decision to choose Couchbase. However, if we had to do it over again I'm unsure if Couchbase would beat out other solutions.
As I have been telling all along, PostgreSQL is much cheaper compared to the other RDBMS solutions. It has got better performance with some of the application services that we are using and is easy to maintain. Overall, we are satisfied migrating to PostgreSQL database clusters.
Its main characteristic is the integrity of the data. In addition, being free software, it has no costs associated with its license, which allows the number of installations to be scaled without problems.
The technical staff quickly learns about its installation, configuration …
As mentioned previously, I came from primarily a MySQL background. I had used other databases such as SQL Server and Oracle, but MySQL is what I used most of the time for my RDBMS needs before switching to PostgreSQL. MySQL/MariaDB certainly have some great strengths, but I …
Compared to MySQL, it works well if you need to extend to your use case Compared to Spark, it works better w.r.t development time in a central database setting Like Redis, it cannot be used for caching and quick access of non-structured data
We are big users of MySQL and PostgreSQL. We were looking at replacing our aging web page caching technology and found that we could do it in SQL, but there was a NoSQL movement happening at the time. We dabbled a bit in the NoSQL scene just to get an idea of what it was about …
UI isn't that great compared to the other competitors. The management of our memcached cluster was becoming pretty complicated as the application grew in size. Redis is a much better option compared to memcached. Redis is bit unreliable compared to the alternative RabbitMQ …
Every time you don't need a document DB, you can't go wrong with Redis over MongoDB. Google Cloud Pub/Sub may have solved one use case, but we'd still have to deploy Redis instances for other use cases, and adding another tech stack would only add complexity to our …
Couchbase doesn't keep up with what they offer and what really does. MongoDB just doesn't scale out, reads are performed across multiple nodes but writes still go to the single master. DynamoDB is good overall but just way too expensive.
The only other product I've used that I would compare to Redis is Memcache. I prefer Redis simply because of its ease of use and it's very well documented. It also has a lot of community support which means there are a large number of client libraries that exist to make the …
As we perform a lot of deployments to AWS, we have the option of easily using a cache layer with either Memcache or Redis. We almost always choose Redis as it can solve more problems in production than Memcache in our experience. There is some overlap between what Redis can do …
We chose Redis over Memcached and Couchbase for its performance, cost, support, and ease of use. Couchbase probably would have worked as well, but it seemed a bit overkill for our use cases.
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.
PostgreSQL is best used for structured data, and best when following relational database design principles. I would not use PostgreSQL for large unstructured data such as video, images, sound files, xml documents, web-pages, especially if these files have their own highly variable, internal structure.
Redis has been a great investment for our organization as we needed a solution for high speed data caching. The ramp up and integration was quite easy. Redis handles automatic failover internally, so no crashes provides high availability. On the fly scaling scale to more/less cores and memory as and when needed.
Easy for developers to understand. Unlike Riak, which I've used in the past, it's fast without having to worry about eventual consistency.
Reliable. With a proper multi-node configuration, it can handle failover instantly.
Configurable. We primarily still use Memcache for caching but one of the teams uses Redis for both long-term storage and temporary expiry keys without taking on another external dependency.
Fast. We process tens of thousands of RPS and it doesn't skip a beat.
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.
We had some difficulty scaling Redis without it becoming prohibitively expensive.
Redis has very simple search capabilities, which means its not suitable for all use cases.
Redis doesn't have good native support for storing data in object form and many libraries built over it return data as a string, meaning you need build your own serialization layer over it.
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
We will definitely continue using Redis because: 1. It is free and open source. 2. We already use it in so many applications, it will be hard for us to let go. 3. There isn't another competitive product that we know of that gives a better performance. 4. We never had any major issues with Redis, so no point turning our backs.
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.
Postgresql is the best tool out there for relational data so I have to give it a high rating when it comes to analytics, data availability and consistency, so on and so forth. SQL is also a relatively consistent language so when it comes to building new tables and loading data in from the OLTP database, there are enough tools where we can perform ETL on a scalable basis.
It is quite simple to set up for the purpose of managing user sessions in the backend. It can be easily integrated with other products or technologies, such as Spring in Java. If you need to actually display the data stored in Redis in your application this is a bit difficult to understand initially but is possible.
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.
The data queries are relatively quick for a small to medium sized table. With complex joins, and a wide and deep table however, the performance of the query has room for improvement.
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.
There are several companies that you can contract for technical support, like EnterpriseDB or Percona, both first level in expertise and commitment to the software.
But we do not have contracts with them, we have done all the way from googling to forums, and never have a problem that we cannot resolve or pass around. And for dozens of projects and more than 15 years now.
The support team has always been excellent in handling our mostly questions, rarely problems. They are responsive, find the solution and get us moving forward again. I have never had to escalate a case with them. They have always solved our problems in a very timely manner. I highly commend the support team.
The online training is request based. Had there been recorded videos available online for potential users to benefit from, I could have rated it higher. The online documentation however is very helpful. The online documentation PDF is downloadable and allows users to pace their own learning. With examples and code snippets, the documentation is great starting point.
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.
Although the competition between the different databases is increasingly aggressive in the sense that they provide many improvements, new functionalities, compatibility with complementary components or environments, in some cases it requires that it be followed within the same family of applications that performs the company that develops it and that is not all bad, but being able to adapt or configure different programs, applications or other environments developed by third parties apart is what gives PostgreSQL a certain advantage and this diversification in the components that can be joined with it, is the reason why it is a great option to choose.
We are big users of MySQL and PostgreSQL. We were looking at replacing our aging web page caching technology and found that we could do it in SQL, but there was a NoSQL movement happening at the time. We dabbled a bit in the NoSQL scene just to get an idea of what it was about and whether it was for us. We tried a bunch, but I can only seem to remember Mongo and Couch. Mongo had big issues early on that drove us to Redis and we couldn't quite figure out how to deploy couch.
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
Easy to administer so our DevOps team has only ever used minimal time to setup, tune, and maintain.
Easy to interface with so our Engineering team has only ever used minimal time to query or modify the database. Getting the data is straightforward, what we do with it is the bigger concern.
Redis has helped us increase our throughput and server data to a growing amount of traffic while keeping our app fast. We couldn't have grown without the ability to easily cache data that Redis provides.
Redis has helped us decrease the load on our database. By being able to scale up and cache important data, we reduce the load on our database reducing costs and infra issues.
Running a Redis node on something like AWS can be costly, but it is often a requirement for scaling a company. If you need data quickly and your business is already a positive ROI, Redis is worth the investment.
