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
SQLite
Score 9.6 out of 10
N/A
SQLite is an in-process library that implements a self-contained, serverless, zero-configuration, transactional SQL database engine. The code for SQLite is in the public domain and is thus free for use for any purpose, commercial or private. SQLite is one of the most widely deployed databases in the world.
N/A
Pricing
Apache CouchDB
SQLite
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
CouchDB
SQLite
Free Trial
No
No
Free/Freemium Version
No
No
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
No
No
Entry-level Setup Fee
No setup fee
No setup fee
Additional Details
—
—
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Apache CouchDB
SQLite
Considered Both Products
CouchDB
Verified User
Anonymous
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 …
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 …
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 …
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 …
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.
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 …
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 …
SQLite is faster and also Light weight as compared to Microsoft SQL Server. Also being open source it reduces the application development cost drastically
SQLite has CRUD queries and manipulates external files. Cross-platform support includes iOS, Android, Mac OS X, and Windows. Compared to other databases, it is fast and straightforward to implement. Even if an application crashes, there is no effect on the database or the data …
We looked at other traditional RDBMS products, but found them to be cumbersome to deploy. They take up more space, and consume more computing resources than SQLite does. While the performance or direct integration to our primary applications may have been better or easier if we …
SQLite has many types of queries to do CRUD operations. and even do manipulation to external files as well. it is fast and easy to implement compared to other Databases. SQLite support atomic behaviours, so app crash in any situation, the won't impact database or data within …
SQLite is considered better against these two depending on the needs and phase of the project. If we require a lightweight yet reliable database which should also be portable across different platforms and speed is the most important part of the query and data security is not …
I think there is no real competition between them. In "SQLite" you can hear "light" when you don't need to store a big amount of data and when you need something easy to deploy, SQLite is a good choice, I didn't find those qualities in other database systems I knew.
When looking at the original items available, Valentina was a serious contender. What was good about SQLite was the familiar SQL interface and way it accessed data. Valentina, at the time, had issues with index corruption requiring vigilance with the database maintenance making …
SQLite stacks quite well against Microsoft SQL server management studio however we need the Microsoft security for our data MDSN documentation is poor but available.
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.
The portability and ease of use has us doing local development, and then shipping the database to production for implementation. This compact deliverable object is great. Until multiple developers need to access it at a time. It is a caveat, but we create a database per integration as it is easier to manage. Using a SQLite database to manage more than one integration or task is not something we would recommend.
Although it is excellent at what it does, you should be really careful and plan accordingly if you know that your database is going to scale at a huge level because it is not suitable of databases which are of Enterprise level and demands top-notch security and protection.
If your project involves multiple people working on the same database simultaneously, then that becomes a big problem, because it only allows single write at one time. You really need to be forward thinking in a manner to predict if this database will cater to all the needs of your project.
The most common difficulty with this is the lack of some of the basic functionality which is present in the other premier databases like Joints, Stored Procedure calls, Security and permission grants. If you do require all those things then you are better off not using this software.
Lastly, if you are using this in an Andriod App development cycle then also your options are limited because it does not integrate with PostgreSQL and MYSQL.
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.
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
I have had a wonderful experience with SQLite because in my every project I use SQLite in the development phase because it's really fast, doesn't crash and very easy to maintain as well. It saves a lot on physical memory and dedicated server usage. It has all the basic functionality you would need to get the job done and that too at no cost at all. What more could you ask for !!!
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
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
SQLite has CRUD queries and manipulates external files. Cross-platform support includes iOS, Android, Mac OS X, and Windows. Compared to other databases, it is fast and straightforward to implement. Even if an application crashes, there is no effect on the database or the data it contains. The user interface is best for input and output. It's best for developing skills and project deliverables.
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.
The active community has kept support costs low, further increasing ROI
The wide range of supported platforms and high level of compatibility has increased ROI by reducing time spent porting the database model to any platform specific solutions.