Couchbase Reviews

Initially we were using the on-premise Couchbase Server which was maintained by the organisation with assistance from a consultant from Couchbase. After they came up with the cloud version of Couchbase called Capella, it was decided to migrate there to reduce the maintenance cost and to take advantage of the advanced features the product offers. 

Couchbase Capella offered distinct advantages like ease of horizontal and vertical autoscaling, ease of querying using the SQL++ language (which is not hard to learn), and the flexibility it offers while being hosted in the cloud and being served by the parent company.

We moved from a relational database to a non-relational database, where there is no format for storage of data, no linking of different tables, and not too much effort is required in learning the query language. This has made data storage an easier process and querying effort is optimum. 

Easy querying language. 

Easy to increase server capacity as per usage demand.

Easy UI interface.

Data storage is easy and we do not have to navigate different tables for extracting relational data.

Time to extract the data is faster than non-relational databases and hence there are fewer performance issues.

Earlier services were designed to be integrated with the non-relational databases and when a different type of database is introduced it is obvious that there will be issues in integrating with the existing infrastructure. Same was encountered when trying to integrate Couchbase and exhaustive testing of the setup was done to check for data integrity.

An area of improvement for Couchbase would be to integrate the 3 parts of the Couchbase server (Server, Sync Gateway and Couchbase Lite) into a single unit so the integration with the customer infrastructure becomes easier.

I have been using it for one year. 

For Couchbase server, nodes have to be created or reduced based on requirements, which is a technically complex task.

For Couchbase Capella, there are different combinations CPU and Memory available which can be configured as per requirements and hence it is more flexible. 

Couchbase could also improve with their technical support and provide project specific solutions rather than generic.

Positive

Couchbase is a good NoSQL server and I would recommend it to users, simply because if the simple way of storing the data (in the form of JSON) as well the easy process to retrieve it.

Customer support is good and they will help you in suggesting mitigation measures for most of the issues being faced by the project.

There is no major knowledge gap while transitioning to a non-relational database, knowledge of SQL querying and JSOn models are sufficient. 

Overall, I would rate it an eight out of ten. 

We use it for data link utilization.

The horizontal scale is a major factor. We want to be able to expand our capacity horizontally.

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.

It's pretty stable. We like it.

Scalability could be a bit more desirable. We are probably a little hardware limited.

With AWS, it might be better. We're also looking at DynamoDB as a possible replacement.

We also looked at MongoDB, some sort of eMemory, and cache layered with a traditional relational database for performance sake, because we churn a lot of data. We collect for each customer upwards of around 20GB/hour of data. Therefore, performance is important to us, so NoSQL eventually became the obvious choice.

The decision was between this solution and MongoDB. We chose this because it came with N1QL, which is their query language. Whereas MongoDB, at that time, did not come with any sort of query capability.

Couchbase is a good solution to a lot of problems, but you will have to do your own research on it. It does have the scalability. It fits most of our needs. Though, the performance could be quicker and better, especially in the querying process.

We actually have not used it with AWS. We just purchased directly with them, and we have our own hardware. As part of our solution, we are now looking to move some of the solution to AWS. We want to provide solutions to our customers and package it as a product, and it feels like a lot of people are asking for cloud as an option. Therefore, we are looking into cloud deployments instead of on-premise deployments.

I am using Couchbase for searching web services to find user metadata.

The most valuable feature of Couchbase is document indexing. It is better than MongoDB. Additionally, the solution is easy to use.

Couchbase could improve the design of the UI because it should be optimized for viewing statistics or a similar feature.

I have been using Couchbase for approximately two years.

The stability of the solution depends on what environment it is deployed in.

I rate the stability of Couchbase an eight out of ten.

The solution scales well for my usage.

We have five people using this solution in my company.

I rate the scalability of Couchbase an eight out of ten.

I have not used the support from Couchbase. If I encounter issues I used the internet for the use cases that I struggle with to find solutions.

I have used MongoDB previously. Couchbase has an administration panel that is more advanced than MongoDB and allows for more cultivation.

In a runtime environment such as Couchbase, the indexing system can struggle when dealing with large numbers of documents, such as two or three million. This can lead to a delay in the intake of documents. However, I have not used MongoDB in a scenario where such a large number of documents is necessary.

I used Docker to help me set up Couchbase and it was easy. The full process takes 10 to 15 minutes to implement.

I rate the initial setup of Couchbase a ten out of ten.

When considering a NoSQL database, I would recommend MongoDB as the first choice. However, if additional tools or functionalities are needed, then Couchbase may be a better option.

I rate Couchbase a seven out of ten.

In our current project, we use this solution in the healthcare field for the telemedical industry and in other projects in the automation industry.

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.

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.

We have recently started using the solution.

The solution has been reliable and stable.

We have not attempted to scale the solution at this time because we are a large company that needs more security. We are in the early stages of integrating DTS technology, our chosen security solution, once implemented we will begin scaling Couchbase.

The technical support has been responsive and they provide good support.

The installation could be difficult for some engineers that are brand new to the implementation because the reference documents are much harder to find than other solutions, such as MongoDB.

For the cloud-based solution, there are a number of options available when it comes to the frequency of license payments. You can purchase a license monthly, quarterly, and annually. Since our project includes IoT from another solution this pricing model could be complicated for us.

The price of this solution is better than some of the other competitors.

I have evaluated MongoDB and it is lacking some features that Couchbase has making it a complete solution. With MongoDB, we would need another solution to work alongside it to function the same as Couchbase.

I would recommend this solution to others.

I rate Couchbasean eight out of ten.

There are many shifts and we use Couchbase to log that data whenever they travel from one place to another. We log the data and we merge it in the backend. That's how the application and everything works. If you are a temp person on one shift and you have logged data, we use the nearby API to connect them and to pull and push each other's data. 

We also use Couchbase for Android tablet to the cloud. 

The most valuable features are the ease of application and the merging of data.

I have tried multiple libraries in a demo they provide and it works fine, but when it merges with libraries, it creates a problem.

I have been using Couchbase for six to eight months. 

It is stable.

Couchbase is scalable. There are eight to ten users who use it in my company.

Their support is supportive. 

The initial setup was complex. It was a quick implementation. 

My recommendation of Couchbase would depend on the user's requirements. 

I would rate Couchbase an eight out of ten.