We performed a comparison between Cassandra and Couchbase based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two NoSQL Databases solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The most valuable feature of Cassandra is its fast retrieval. Additionally, the solution can handle large amounts of data. It is the quickest application we use."
"The solution's database capabilities are very good."
"I am satisfied with the performance."
"The use of Cassandra in real-time data analytics has been pivotal for our e-commerce platform. As our platform operates 24/7, providing services to sellers and customers alike, the need for real-time updates is paramount."
"The most valuable features of this solution are its speed and distributed nature."
"Some of the valued features of this solution are it has good performance and failover."
"Our primary use case for the solution is testing."
"A consistent solution."
"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."
"The most valuable feature of Couchbase is document indexing. It is better than MongoDB. Additionally, the solution is easy to use."
"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."
"The most valuable features are the ease of application and the merging of data."
"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."
"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 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."
"Depending upon our schema, we can't make ORDER BY or GROUP BY clauses in the product."
"The solution is limited to a linear performance."
"The solution is not easy to use because it is a big database and you have to learn the interface. This is the case though in most of these solutions."
"Doesn't support a solution that can give aggregation."
"There were challenges with the query language and the development interface. The query language, in particular, could be improved for better optimization. These challenges were encountered while using the Java SDK."
"Cassandra can improve by adding more built-in tools. For example, if you want to do some maintenance activities in the cluster, we have to depend on third-party tools. Having these tools build-in would be e benefit."
"It can be difficult to analyze what's going on inside of the database relative to other databases. It can also be difficult to troubleshoot sometimes."
"The disc space is lacking. You need to free it up as you are working."
"One thing that could improved upon is the level of concurrency. The documentation for this solution could also be improved."
"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 would like to have a better management of Kubernetes with the free, open source version of Couchbase. We don't have any major complaints other than that."
"I have tried multiple libraries in a demo they provide and it works fine, but when it merges with libraries, it creates a problem."
"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."
"The performance could be quicker and better, especially in the querying process."
"Couchbase could improve the design of the UI because it should be optimized for viewing statistics or a similar feature."
Cassandra is ranked 4th in NoSQL Databases with 19 reviews while Couchbase is ranked 2nd in NoSQL Databases with 10 reviews. Cassandra is rated 8.0, while Couchbase is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Cassandra writes "Well-equipped to handle a massive influx of data and billions of requests". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Couchbase writes "No SQL cloud based solution used to manage unstructured data and push out large volumes of metrics at a low latency". Cassandra is most compared with InfluxDB, MongoDB, ScyllaDB, Oracle NoSQL and Neo4j Graph Database, whereas Couchbase is most compared with MongoDB, ScyllaDB, CouchDB, Aerospike Database 7 and InfluxDB. See our Cassandra vs. Couchbase report.
See our list of best NoSQL Databases vendors.
We monitor all NoSQL Databases reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
