Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Couchbase vs ScyllaDB comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jan 7, 2025

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

Couchbase
Ranking in NoSQL Databases
4th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
13
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
ScyllaDB
Ranking in NoSQL Databases
2nd
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
12
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2025, in the NoSQL Databases category, the mindshare of Couchbase is 11.3%, up from 10.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of ScyllaDB is 10.6%, up from 9.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
NoSQL Databases
 

Featured Reviews

Ravi_Singh  - PeerSpot reviewer
Supports multiple data models and offers AI capabilities
With some of the operations, we used to face some challenges with scalability. Although it worked pretty well, in some scenarios, we noticed issues where the replications and the sharding were not happening correctly. In recent versions, we also faced some issues in terms of enabling advanced operations like FTS and vectors. Although it works pretty well, in some places, we do face challenges, especially on a heavy scale. I think all issues are being addressed in the latest version of Couchbase. The resources are not that good for Couchbase. The tool's documentation is pretty extensive, but if you go for any kind of courses or tutorials, there are very limited resources available. It also becomes a little bit challenging for new people to get onboard into it. MongoDB and other such open-source database tools perform really well as they're really widely adopted, and they have resources available to get you onboarded pretty quickly. I think that we do face some challenges with Couchbase, but luckily, we have the tool's enterprise version solution, so we get all the support from the product team.
ArpitShah - PeerSpot reviewer
Self-hosting complexity and the way ScyllaDB counts operations can be confusing and may not reflect actual usage
It seems we have better options available. So probably don't go for ScyllaDB. The reason is, first, it's very high. It's not as straightforward as, like, Postgres or ClickHouse to set up. It requires a complex setup. The other problem is what they call. For example, they will say that for up to a million operations, you experience this. But the problem is if they have nine servers, then your one operation is counted as nine operations, not one. So, even though you have one write, they count it as nine. It's like it's just not false premises. You can always host it yourself, but then it's way more complex. The benefits are not substantially more than those of other databases. It's not that it's slow or anything. It's good enough and all. But it's just that ClickHouse or other databases are simpler and faster and probably provide more features. So, I kind of burn out from the database, and that's why I would keep it small.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"It can scale horizontally, and we are looking to expand our capacity."
"The valuable features of Couchbase are the many documents and index types, and they made a lot of features available enabling us to use it as a complete solution for our needs."
"The whole stack is valuable, but the portion of the stack that we're finding really handy is the analytics engine because that allows us to take and pre-build views."
"Couchbase has not given any performance problems as of now."
"The principal advantage of Couchbase is that we can have multiple database paradigms in the same product, without deploying multiple databases. We also like that it has lower latency, when compared to its competitor: Cassandra."
"It is highly available for support and does not impact our operations significantly during failures."
"The main advantages were associated with it being a no SQL database. It helped us send out metrics or rewards to multiple players in our game at a very low latency."
"I can input any kind of document into the solution and it is integrated using a dynamic API. This has been the most valuable aspect of using this solution."
"ScyllaDB is very fast, and I can use it for so many things."
"It is lightweight, and it requires less infrastructure."
"Firstly, if I update something, it's most likely to finish within milliseconds."
"ScyllaDB allows fine-tuning of the table structure. Speed is probably the most critical factor because we perform a lot of heavy data ingestion. One of its core features is its ability to handle high volumes and maintain speed when accessing data. Additionally, high availability and partitioning are built-in features of ScyllaDB."
"The documentation is good. It integrates easily with our existing data infrastructure."
"The performance aspects of Scylla are good, as always... A good point about Scylla is that it can be used extensively."
"The performance and scalability are good, and we hardly see any major issues with ScyllaDB."
"The product's most valuable features are efficiency and reliability."
 

Cons

"It is very difficult to load the backup of the older version to the newer version."
"The scripting language for this solution could be improved. A big selling point is that they're like SQL server but there is still quite a lot of missing functionality."
"Although it worked pretty well, in some scenarios, we noticed issues where the replications and the sharding were not happening correctly."
"The platform's grouping features need improvement."
"The performance could be quicker and better, especially in the querying process."
"The failover and failback could be a bit easier. When I looked at it last time, it had to be manually done. It also took over an hour for us to rebalance all the nodes."
"There are some limitations to the database. The SQL database cannot handle real-time processing for critical IoT scenarios. What we have to do is store our data into the database then code it out, this wastes a lot of time."
"One thing that could improved upon is the level of concurrency. The documentation for this solution could also be improved."
"Data export, along with how we can purchase the data periodically, needs to be improved so that the storage is within control. Then, we could optimize it even better."
"Some of the regular commands in NoSQL do not work."
"The documentation of Scylla is an area with shortcomings and needs to be improved."
"From a sales pitch standpoint, it needs to deliver on promises of better ROI and compaction."
"ScyllaDB needs to improve its handling of transactions."
"The documentation is not well established for new developers."
"If you don't have the best computing resources, then it's not easy to set up. In such cases, we have to run ScyllaDB in developer mode."
"It seems we have better options available. So probably don't go for ScyllaDB. The reason is, first, it's very high. It's not as straightforward as, like, Postgres or ClickHouse to set up. It requires a complex setup."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It seems very reasonable. It's a lot cheaper than Redis, but we've got an enterprise license. So, it's about normal. It's not outrageous in price as far as we've seen. From Couchbase, there's no additional fee as far as I'm aware, but when you're integrating, there's an additional fee because a lot of times, they don't have an integration stack."
"The licensing cost of Couchbase is quite expensive compared to other databases."
"The price of this solution is better than some of the other competitors."
"I would rate this solution a nine out of ten for pricing as it is affordable."
"We estimate that it's not very expensive, however, the pricing that you can get from the account managers, e.g. the public pricing, could be a bit expensive."
"I wouldn't say Couchbase offers good value for money."
"It's a bit expensive."
"It's free."
"I believe that there is a yearly licensing cost and that it's expensive."
"The paid version of ScyllaDB is not that expensive. The main advantage of the paid version is direct support from the ScyllaDB team, which can resolve issues faster—typically within a day, compared to two to three days with the free version. The paid version also offers better guidance and support, while the free version has good documentation and is more high-level. I’d rate their support team nine out of ten because of the quick responses from their community."
"It is an expensive tool compared to its competitor."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which NoSQL Databases solutions are best for your needs.
832,138 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
22%
Computer Software Company
15%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Retailer
7%
Computer Software Company
18%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Comms Service Provider
5%
Hospitality Company
5%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Couchbase?
The whole stack is valuable, but the portion of the stack that we're finding really handy is the analytics engine because that allows us to take and pre-build views.
What needs improvement with Couchbase?
With some of the operations, we used to face some challenges with scalability. Although it worked pretty well, in some scenarios, we noticed issues where the replications and the sharding were not ...
What is your primary use case for Couchbase?
In my company, we use the enterprise version of Couchbase, and it is used across the organization for its database operations. We do only use the NoSQL database, not Couchbase Capella. The tool is ...
What do you like most about Scylla?
The performance aspects of Scylla are good, as always... A good point about Scylla is that it can be used extensively.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Scylla?
The enterprise version comes with a cost of about $300,000 per year, however, we did not experience the promised compaction benefits.
What needs improvement with Scylla?
From a sales pitch standpoint, it needs to deliver on promises of better ROI and compaction. Additionally, ticketing and support systems could be improved due to the time it takes to get answers. T...
 

Comparisons

 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Amadeus, Cisco, Comcast, LinkedIn, GE
IBM, Investing.com, mParticle, Comcast, GE, Fanatics, Ola, CERN, adgear, Samsung
Find out what your peers are saying about Couchbase vs. ScyllaDB and other solutions. Updated: January 2025.
832,138 professionals have used our research since 2012.