Apache CouchDB vs. FirebirdSQL

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
CouchDB
Score 6.0 out of 10
N/A
Apache CouchDB is an HTTP + JSON document database with Map Reduce views and bi-directional replication. The Couch Replication Protocol is implemented in a variety of projects and products that span computing environments from globally distributed server-clusters, over mobile phones to web browsers.N/A
Firebird
Score 9.8 out of 10
N/A
FirebirdSQL is an open-source database which can be embedded.N/A
Pricing
Apache CouchDBFirebirdSQL
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
CouchDBFirebird
Free Trial
NoNo
Free/Freemium Version
NoNo
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup fee
Additional Details
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Apache CouchDBFirebirdSQL
Considered Both Products
CouchDB
Chose CouchDB
Open Source, and freely able to install it on any OS you desire (the big 3, anyways) CouchDB was selected for that, it's early-adoption of JSON and its mobile-friendly environment. Also, I have used it off and on in various non-professional projects, and it was really one of …
Chose CouchDB
Compared to MongoDB, CouchDB's Map-Reduce paradigm poses a steeper learning curve for SQL users. However, CouchDB's master-master replication is an advantage of implementing a load-balanced solution.
Even though, currently, CouchDB has strong community support, as an open …
Chose CouchDB
MongoDB and CouchDB are both document stores, but their concurrency models and ability to scale are very different. MongoDB cannot replicate / shard over unreliable links and network partitions have been the cause of data loss in the past. MongoDB has an easier query language …
Chose CouchDB
It has been 5+ years since we chose CouchDB. We looked an MongoDB, Cassandra, and probably some others. At the end of the day, the performance, power potential, and simplicity of CouchDB made it a simple choice for our needs. No one should use just because we did. As I said …
Chose CouchDB
S3 blew this out of the water, we can get over 30 files a second, almost no failures, auto backed up, don't need our own server, and a much simpler interface with PHP Laravel.
Chose CouchDB
We looked at MongoDB and Firebase. MongoDB gives us the best working db engine with a very intuitive design. However, it does not work as well offline. Firebase was extremely hard to create searching and indexing. Using a third-party to search didn't work for us or at least it …
Chose CouchDB
Developing spring boot apps with Couchbase using Spring Data JPA really solves complexity of programming.
Chose CouchDB
I have briefly used MongoDB in other products, and it proved that it had better integration capabilities with Ruby on Rails and node.js software platforms, more than CouchDB. But I never had the chance to actually replace CouchDB with MongoDB in the current product to see what …
Chose CouchDB
It stacks up well against Mongo DB. Mongo DB definitely has more marketing and developer and customer mindshare because it is so widely known.
Chose CouchDB
CouchbaseDB is essentially faster with more options but of course with a cost. Cloudant is the hosted option with a better security schema.
Firebird
Chose Firebird
It is cost-effective, maintenance-free, easy to deploy and use on Linux and Windows environments and it works steadily. It has an open-source license. Installing Oracle was quite difficult in comparison to Firebird.
Chose Firebird
It came a time when the practice of SQLite was lagging behind and of course, we were looking at the cost that was being involved and so Firebird made the breakthrough for us from both. It has an open-source license and it is easy to deploy on Windows and Linux environments.
Chose Firebird
As you know, the version of an application is very good for a period in the world of information technologies, it is the first in the performance / cost table. But some periods come and that practice lags behind. When Firebird made such a breakthrough, we preferred this …
Chose Firebird
Back then I evaluated Oracle 8, IBM DB2, Mimer, SAP DB, MySQL, Borland Interbase (not Embarcadero Interbase and that one has the same roots as Firebird) and most likely other RDBMS. Firebird was free, usage was ok, it was (for my application) maintenance free and speed was ok …
Features
Apache CouchDBFirebirdSQL
NoSQL Databases
Comparison of NoSQL Databases features of Product A and Product B
Apache CouchDB
7.9
Ratings
11% below category average
FirebirdSQL
-
Ratings
Performance8.00 Ratings00 Ratings
Availability8.50 Ratings00 Ratings
Concurrency8.50 Ratings00 Ratings
Security6.00 Ratings00 Ratings
Scalability8.00 Ratings00 Ratings
Data model flexibility7.00 Ratings00 Ratings
Deployment model flexibility9.00 Ratings00 Ratings
Best Alternatives
Apache CouchDBFirebirdSQL
Small Businesses
IBM Cloudant
IBM Cloudant
Score 7.4 out of 10
InfluxDB
InfluxDB
Score 8.8 out of 10
Medium-sized Companies
IBM Cloudant
IBM Cloudant
Score 7.4 out of 10
SQLite
SQLite
Score 9.6 out of 10
Enterprises
IBM Cloudant
IBM Cloudant
Score 7.4 out of 10
SQLite
SQLite
Score 9.6 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
Apache CouchDBFirebirdSQL
Likelihood to Recommend
9.0
(0 ratings)
8.2
(0 ratings)
Likelihood to Renew
9.0
(0 ratings)
9.0
(0 ratings)
Usability
8.0
(0 ratings)
8.0
(0 ratings)
Support Rating
-
(0 ratings)
5.0
(0 ratings)
Implementation Rating
9.0
(0 ratings)
9.0
(0 ratings)
User Testimonials
Apache CouchDBFirebirdSQL
Likelihood to Recommend
It's good as a general JSON document store and basic map/reduce system. For more specialized tasks like message queuing, graph traversal, streaming metrics aggregation, or arbitrary table joins, I'd recommend another database.
Read full review
When looking for low maintenance and a solution suited for all kinds of pc applications. It is great when you are looking to store physical files in folder locations and you can then reference the document in the database. It has an open-source community around it along with documentation for third-party drivers of the development environment.
Read full review
Pros
  • Ease of install and setup.
  • Ease of syncing with another database. This was truly set it and forget it.
  • The REST API to read data. No additional drivers are needed to work with CouchDB.
Read full review
  • Reliable RDMS for the SMB's and we found its performance is really fast.
  • It allows us to store the physical files into the folder location and reference of the document in the database.
  • Easy to take back-ups, and portable.
Read full review
Cons
  • SUPER SLOW. We do tons of data and S3 and just using the file system were both way faster
  • Using views is too complex
  • Stores entire DB as 1 file, good luck when it becomes many TB
Read full review
  • Clustering features require alot of attention.
  • Remote access can be quite slow.
Read full review
Likelihood to Renew
As a highly distributed database system, CouchDB naturally has strong high availability with traffic load-balancing capability. It is also easy to scale and replicate data in a cluster for redundancy. However, there is still some room for query performance improvement in the future.
Read full review
Because it is free and usually zero maintenance. Just the issue of more difficult format updates in the future lower the rating a bit.
Read full review
Usability
Couchdb is very simple to use and the features are also reduced but well implemented. In order to use it the way its designed, the ui is adequate and easy. Of course, there are some other task that can't be performed through the admin ui but the minimalistic design allows you to use external libraries to develop custom scripts
Read full review
Usability has improved by unifying the architecture. The only thing's missing out of the box is a simple GUI DB tool for viewing DB contents and maybe running some SQL queries.
Read full review
Support Rating
No answers on this topic
This is an open source project. It provides a fair amount of free documentation and I think forums somewhere...
Read full review
Implementation Rating
it support is minimal also hw requirements. Also for development, we can have databases replicated everywhere and the replication is automagical. once you set up the security and the rules for replication, you are ready to go. The absence of a model let you build your app the way you want it
Read full review
Even somebody just starting to use RDBMS himself should get it working quickly, at least if he's got a GUI tool and some SQL knowledge.
Read full review
Alternatives Considered
Open Source, and freely able to install it on any OS you desire (the big 3, anyways) CouchDB was selected for that, it's early-adoption of JSON and its mobile-friendly environment. Also, I have used it off and on in various non-professional projects, and it was really one of the first exposure to databases in my career
Read full review
It is cost-effective, maintenance-free, easy to deploy and use on Linux and Windows environments and it works steadily. It has an open-source license. Installing Oracle was quite difficult in comparison to Firebird.
Read full review
Return on Investment
  • Biggest impact on our business has been that CouchDB has been pretty invisible from a cost or issues perspective. It just works.
  • We use the Apache releases, so it's free. Of course there is a cost to "free" - we have invested time to become fluent in using and understanding CouchDB. But we feel the investment was well worth the effort and we have a solid, fundamental technology to our products that "just works".
  • There are some things we do - SaaS vs self-hosting - that have probably been kept simple by using CouchDB. Overall, we are extremely happy with CouchDB.
Read full review
  • The return on investment was of course because it freed us from paid relational databases.
  • We have never experienced a negative situation.
Read full review
ScreenShots