1. Home
  2. NoSQL Databases
  3. IBM Cloudant Reviews
  4. User Review of IBM Cloudant
A simple database with fully-featured GUI, "just works" scaling and replication, and straightforward pricing
Updated July 17, 2022

A simple database with fully-featured GUI, "just works" scaling and replication, and straightforward pricing

Anonymous | TrustRadius Reviewer
Score 8 out of 10
Vetted Review
Verified User

Overall Satisfaction with IBM Cloudant

We used the IBM Cloudant in two scenarios: One, for a simple place to persist text to be displayed in a chatbot that played nicely with the rest of our IBM Cloud stack, particularly with IBM Cloud Functions; and the other, a database with a simple enough query language for non-engineers to learn — which should also work nicely with IBM Cloud Functions and have a built-in, easy to use GUI
  • Integration with Cloud Functions
  • Included GUI for non-engineers
  • Fixed, throughput/expected use-based pricing
  • Better documentation
  • Expensive pricing for very small projects
  • Better tabular views
  • Eliminated the need to export data for non-engineers
  • Reduced "time to answers" by giving direct access to the database
  • Delegate analytics and edit tasks

Do you think IBM Cloudant delivers good value for the price?

Yes

Are you happy with IBM Cloudant's feature set?

Yes

Did IBM Cloudant live up to sales and marketing promises?

Yes

Did implementation of IBM Cloudant go as expected?

Yes

Would you buy IBM Cloudant again?

Yes

MongoDB Atlas and Azure Cosmos DB are the closest competitors we found with Cloudant, especially in terms of fixed pricing and having a GUI for easy viewing and quick edits of data. Cloudant's pricing model flat out beats MongoDB Atlas' in terms of how easy it would be to predict costs. Cosmos DB is a much closer competitor, as it integrates well with Azure's stack similarly to Cloudant and the rest of the IBM Cloud stack; similar [throughout]-based pricing and replication options; and even the GUI and ease of query using SQL, which my team and I were more familiar with. Where Cloudant beats out Cosmos DB is again having a more simple pricing model (ops/sec vs Cosmos' "request units" voodoo) and being based on open-source software assuaging fears of vendor lock-in.
Our organization found Cloudant most suitable if One, a fixed pricing structure would make the most sense, for example in a situation where the project Cloudant is being used in makes its revenue in procurement or fixed retainer — thus the predictability of costs is paramount; Two, where you need to frequently edit the data and/or share access to the query engine to non-engineers — this is where the GUI shines.

IBM Cloudant Feature Ratings

NoSQL Databases
9.0
Performance
8
Availability
8
Concurrency
8
Security
9
Scalability
10
Data model flexibility
10
Deployment model flexibility
10

No SQL Capabilities

In my experience using IBM Cloudant for applications that involve mostly CRUD operations, I never felt like scaling would be a concern. I can simply dial in the exact amount of throughput to match the needs of my application's traffic. Having the scaling abstracted away is a huge time saver and allows me to better estimate costs.
I appreciate the fine-grained control over scaling. I also appreciate the GUI, allowing me to configure the database to be as simple or as performant as I need it to be. Somehow, I felt Cloudant to be simple when I don't need to dial in settings; but flexible enough when I do need to make changes to the configuration.