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."Cassandra has some features that are more useful for specific use cases where you have time series where you have huge amounts of writes. That should be quick, but not specifically the reads. We needed to have quicker reads and writes and this is why we are using Cassandra right now."
"The most valuable features of this solution are its speed and distributed nature."
"The most valuable features of Cassandra are the NoSQL database, high performance, and zero-copy streaming."
"Some of the valued features of this solution are it has good performance and failover."
"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."
"Can achieve continuous data without a single downtime because of node to node ring architecture."
"Our primary use case for the solution is testing."
"The most valuable features are the counter features and the NoSQL schema. It also has good scalability. You can scale Cassandra to any finite level."
"I have found the views to be very valuable."
"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 most valuable features are the ease of application and the merging of data."
"Sync Gateway is a great feature that supports the mobile application."
"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 feature of Couchbase is document indexing. It is better than MongoDB. Additionally, the solution is easy to use."
"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 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."
"Fine-tuning was a bit of a challenge."
"The solution doesn't have joins between tables so you need other tools for that."
"The secondary index in Cassandra was a bit problematic and could be improved."
"Depending upon our schema, we can't make ORDER BY or GROUP BY clauses in the product."
"Doesn't support a solution that can give aggregation."
"Maybe they can improve their performance in data fetching from a high volume of data sets."
"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."
"Interface is not user friendly."
"It is very difficult to load the backup of the older version to the newer version."
"It's easy to deploy. Where the challenge comes in is when you start putting data in, doing the indexes, and doing the integration with systems. Integration is one of their weakest points. Natively, there should be a wide range of integration options to be able to get data in."
"The performance could be quicker and better, especially in the querying process."
"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."
"I have tried multiple libraries in a demo they provide and it works fine, but when it merges with libraries, it creates a problem."
"Couchbase could improve the design of the UI because it should be optimized for viewing statistics or a similar feature."
"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."
"One thing that could improved upon is the level of concurrency. The documentation for this solution could also be improved."
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 MongoDB, ScyllaDB, InfluxDB, Oracle NoSQL and Chroma, 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.