Couchbase is a distributed NoSQL database platform that combines a JSON document store with a high-performance In-Memory architecture. The solution is designed to support high-throughput applications by integrating multiple data services—including Key-Value, Full-Text Search (FTS), Vector Search, and Real-Time Analytics—within a single unified platform.
N/A
PostgreSQL
Score 8.8 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.
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 …
Couchbase could outperform it's competition considerably for database reads and writes. Full text searches were still faster in Elasticsearch but this is more of a feature than a base platform requirement for us.
At the time, Couchbase seemed the most mature of the NoSQL products and would allow us to achieve the goal of improving data access times for our products and services, giving the most benefit to our customers. MySQL was starting to be the bottleneck in our system performance …
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.
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 …
Single console for managing multi-cluster and multi-cloud deployment options and [the] ability to secure and isolate database information in a secure environment to prevent undefined access is great. Analyzing and delivering information and fast access and processing data …
Experience with DataStax Cassandra was seamless, but the cost and effort to support it was not justified. Also commercial process experience with Couchbase was much better. ActiveSpaces is a good technology for big TIBCO shop, but keeping with the lifecycle of it is not easy. I …
A strategic company, upcoming products, enhanced concepts. Couchbase is a single platform offering many different smaller products together viz Full-Text Search, Analytics, Eventing, Indexing, Querying, Integration with other products.
My expirence with other solutions is very limited, but what I saw/heard is, that on Azure the managed MS SQL Server is said to be more flexible and you can use it in a serverless-ish fashion. But on the other hand, PostgresSQL is still strong regarding its efficiency. And in my …
Being open source, PostgreSQL offers the highest performance among its peers. It has a strong support community where we can find solutions to most of the queries. It's suited for GIS (Geospatial) based applications, making it unique from its peers. There are fewer databases …
PostgreSQL holds it own against both these options. Some of these DBs are in play for certain needs but the majority are PostgreSQL because of cost and operational performance.
In my experience using all of these products over many years, PostgreSQL is better than any of them in reliability, performance, productivity, cost, scalability and interoperability across operating systems.
MySQL is an Oracle product which has in itself some known issues due to that (support, contract terms). Based on my knowledge, PostgreSQL support everything that MySQL support (syntax wise) and it adds more improvements and syntaxes that make the life of database engineers and …
First It's open source and it's cost-effective compared to other databases.PostgreSQL can be easily integrated with numerous platforms. It is well known and appreciated so relying on it as our system database can be easily accepted by our customers. And if your developing a …
For our use cases, PostgreSQL is just as feature rich as other options, costs less, and is simple to get up and running. There is also a plethora of documentation to support it which makes it a great option for a small scale startup without needing high levels of expertise to …
In this case, Postgres is preferred because it handles large data sets and requires fewer hardware resources than its competitor, MySQL. Compared to PostgreSQL, Microsoft products are excellent, but the installation process for MS SQL is lengthy. PostgreSQL has an advantage …
I've been using different databases for the past 20 years, solutions like MS SQL Server, MySQL, MariaDB, Interbase, Firebird, DB2, etc., and by using them I wasn't able to be neither close to the performance PostgreSQL deliver. Also, it is one of the most popular databases on …
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 …
We evaluated both PostgreSQL and MySQL, two popular open source relational databases. While they are very similar in most areas, PostgreSQL's reliability and performance won us over, plus it has much better support from cloud vendors we also work with.
Postgres stacks up just [fine] along the other big players in the RDBMS world. It's very popular for a reason. It's very close to mySQL in terms of cost and features - I'd pick either solution and be just as happy. Compared to Oracle it is a MUCH cheaper solution that is just …
A free corporate professional product. Who does not want to have such a thing, we hesitated because we did not know the product before and frankly we did not want it at first. But when we give it a chance, it has been running smoothly for years.
When we were originally evaluating Redshift we ran into some issue with dates. Either way, Postgres is a better choice than Redshift because it avoids vendor lockin. We ended up choosing Postgres over MySQL because it was easier at the time to get a hosted Postgres cluster up …
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.
Much more mature and stable when compared to MySQL with features such as MVCC, complex subquery plans, ORDBMS, and NoSQL support. With Oracle retaining rights to MySQL its future as an open database is less secure and is no longer in the hands of the community. PostgreSQL also …
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 …
Both Oracle and MS-SQL database option fell when we evaluated the effect on our overall solution cost to our customers. customer examine the overall cost of the solution they buy, selecting Oracle or MS-SQL would leave less money in our pockets. We are Linux based solutions and …
PostgrPostgreSQL as a transaction db engine against oracle and sql server works well. TPM wise compared to MySQL and MariaDB, on an evan scale. SQL function supports, far outweighs compared to MySQL and MariaDB. PG Extensions allow for flexibiltity and scalability. Allows …
We selected PostgreSQL due to the number of employees who have used it in the past. The data consistency guarantees. The multiple transaction isolation levels support.
PostgreSQL outperforms every other option. It is faster, more flexible, more reliable, easier to maintain, and more consistent in behaviour than any of the other offerings.
The main reason for select PostgreSQL against MS SQL Server Express edition is the necessity to use open-source platform, without any issues for licensing, client licensing, etc. etc, which is usually follows developers and project managers when they start to use products and …
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.
Based on my experience, PostgreSQL is exactly what I imagine when thinking of a relational database: it is fast for querying and intuitive (if the underlying relations have been well written) and its writes are also efficient. Of course you need to know that a relational database is what you need, for example I would not recommend it if you have a lot of unstructured data that have no way to create a relation from and if you need to run heavy aggregations over your data, as it is not where PostgreSQL would shine.
The stability it offers, its speed of response and its resource management is excellent even in complex database environments and with low-resource machines.
The large amount of resources it has in addition to the many own and third-party tools that are compatible that make productivity greatly increase.
The adaptability in various environments, whether distributed or not, [is a] complete set of configuration options which allows to greatly customize the work configuration according to the needs that are required.
The excellent handling of referential and transactional integrity, its internal security scheme, the ease with which we can create backups are some of the strengths that can be mentioned.
Cluster sizing during the design phase can be improved, especially if the client lacks prior experience. Vendor consultants are very meticulous in order to provide best of class performance and response time, although some more real-world pragmatic approach is often needed.
Couchbase Lite 2 went thru a major revamp, which broke the compatibility of the applications with some features removed and other changed. That needed development teams working to refactor the applications.
The query syntax for JSON fields is unwieldy when you start getting into complex queries with many joins.
I wish there was a distinction (a flag) you could set for automated scripts vs working in the psql CLI, which would provide an 'Are you sure you want to do X?' type prompt if your query is likely to affect more than a certain number of rows. Especially on updates/deletes. Setting the flag in the headless(scripted) flow would disable the prompt.
Better documentation around JSON and Array aggregation, with more examples of how the data is transformed.
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
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.
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 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.
Couchbase could outperform it's competition considerably for database reads and writes. Full text searches were still faster in Elasticsearch but this is more of a feature than a base platform requirement for us.
In my experience using all of these products over many years, PostgreSQL is better than any of them in reliability, performance, productivity, cost, scalability and interoperability across operating systems.
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
There have been several areas of our application [that] really needed an ACID compliant database (e.g. strong transactional guarantees) that we thought we could work around while using Couchbase. [In my opinion] that turned out to be a poor bet. You need to be certain that the specific characteristics of a NoSQL database fit your problem.
Couchbase does eliminate the need for schema upgrades completely. I.e no downtime or conversion windows as you migrate your data model, adding attributes, etc. This helped with the deployment timeframe associated with DB changes.
The database is (apparently) a bit more of a space/memory consumer than originally anticipated. During deployments, we received constant pressure from Couchbase consulting teams to eliminate/reduce the number of indexes, and this was because any mutations to docs in a bucket must check for impact against all indexes. More recent years have started to address this with their "collections" features, which helps isolate indexes to specific sub-groupings of documents.