RavenDB vs. Redis Software

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
RavenDB
Score 8.1 out of 10
N/A
RavenDB is a NoSQL Document Database that is fully transactional (ACID) across the database and throughout clusters. The database minimizes the need for third party addons, tools, or support to boost developer productivity and get projects into production fast. Users can setup and secure a data cluster deploy in the cloud, on-premise or in a hybrid environment. RavenDB offers a Database as a Service solution, allowing users to pass on all…N/A
Redis Software
Score 8.3 out of 10
N/A
Redis is an open source in-memory data structure server and NoSQL database.N/A
Pricing
RavenDBRedis Software
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
RavenDBRedis Software
Free Trial
YesYes
Free/Freemium Version
YesYes
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeOptional
Additional Details
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
RavenDBRedis Software
Considered Both Products
RavenDB
Chose RavenDB
First of all, Microsoft Access is also a powerful, efficient, and free database. But the feel of it, I mean the GUI is not all great for me. It is very eye-stressing. MongoDB is also a good database, it too is efficient, productive, and powerful. But, upon this, RavenDB is a …
Chose RavenDB
The team is very nice, very helpful, and answer very fast to any answer you may have. Thanks to their help, we were able to use and understand all the RavenDB features in no time! Documentation for server and client is very clear, with a lot of use cases. Maintenance is easy, …
Chose RavenDB
RavenDB is just smarter than the competitors. The mapping reduction sorting is head and shoulders above everything else I've used. Nothing really approaches comparable in terms of complexity. Because of the searching of predetermined categories, read efficiency is terrible. …
Chose RavenDB
The company needed a cache server that was closest and the most accessible, which is why we are currently experimenting with RavenDB which gives us the option to set up our hub in a local setting.
Chose RavenDB
Much better support, more transparent pricing, much more easy setup process, native integration into c# / net core. We also tried to set up a Mongo Atlas cluster by self-study but weren't able to get this running. There is a much better response when searching in google, but a …
Chose RavenDB
While MongoDB is in general more popular, I cannot fathom why that is. If you want ACID support (and as a developer, you'll always want that), MongoDB is way slower when compared to RavenDB. Furthermore, RavenStudio is just integrated, while

Chose RavenDB
Flexibility and performance really set RavenDB apart.
Chose RavenDB
[RavenDB is] just simply much cleverer than the competition. The map reduce indexing is a league above anything else I have used. Nothing else comes close on abstraction as well. Read performance is terrifying due to querying pre calculated indexes. It is just a pity it is not …
Chose RavenDB
Having ACID compliance is a big enough reason to choose RavenDB over the other products. You don't have to worry about losing your data if the plug is pulled. You're able to perform many actions within a transaction and not worry about your data being in a bad state if the …
Chose RavenDB
Installing and configuring. We had some big issues with indexing the data after the documents were created and wanted to expand the index, with millions of records this task mostly did not complete despite a dedicated server.
Chose RavenDB
Out of the many variants of document and SQL databases out there that we have used, RavenDB is our no 1 choice for anything but the smallest projects which can be served with a very small SQL instance. Other than that, RavenDB packs more features and is easier to work with than …
Chose RavenDB
The given alternatives are also powerful and really good noSQL databases but the highest availability of RavenDB allows me/us to know it a lot better.
RavenDB is encrypted by default wherever we use it in production and it has a high level of documents compression.
Chose RavenDB
As I have said before in the previous questions ... RavenDB has a very simple clean UI, but stacks up in its power. Though new to me, I have found it to be much easier to learn and use than my previous database - Microsoft SQL Server. RavenDB's simple design and meaningful …
Chose RavenDB
MongoDB, Alma | Rethink SIS. and Azure Cosmos DB
Chose RavenDB
Being that ACID and cluster transaction support is a big plus against all of them. Cool prices on Azure and AWS is another plus. The ability to search between millions of documents.
Chose RavenDB
When I first started using RavenDB, I did evaluate Mongo DB but found it to be lacking. The primary issue was that Mongo DB did not support atomic consistency for the persistence of multiple documents at the same time, although I think this may not be an issue with subsequent …
Chose RavenDB
We have evaluated or used three other databases in the process of building our product.

Amazon Aurora (MySQL)
Chose RavenDB
Once I had got my head around the concept of a document database it was a happy bye-bye to SQL Server.
Firebird - far too fiddly - I found myself writing a silly API to sit on top of Firebird just to do the most basic things.
MongoDb - in the very short time I spent with it, it …
Chose RavenDB
RavenDB has a richer API, has security out of the box (via certificates), produces indexes automatically and updates them when data changes.
Chose RavenDB
We chose Raven over Mongo because it has robust support for multi-document transactions, first-class .NET and LINQ support, a well-designed API that has inspired imitation and has better tooling out of the box. We chose Raven over Redis because Raven is a full persistent …
Redis Software
Chose Redis Software
Redis Software has a simpler data model than Aerospike.
Memcached doesn't provide any data structures.
Chose Redis Software
UI isn't that great compared to the other competitors.
The management of our memcached cluster was becoming pretty complicated as the application grew in size. Redis is a much better option compared to memcached.
Redis is bit unreliable compared to the alternative RabbitMQ …
Chose Redis Software
We divide projects between Redis and Elasticsearch Service. In some parts or modules one of these two databases fit better than the other.
Chose Redis Software
Alibaba Cloud Elastic Compute Service (ECS) and Amazon ElastiCache
Chose Redis Software
All are good products. MongoDB is a great NoSQL DB but didn't seem to have the high performance caching of Redis. Coherence and Xtreme Scale are expensive. In my opinion for our particular use case, Redis was the clear winner.
Chose Redis Software
Redis is faster, provides documents JSON-wise with the proper odule and it is far more stable than Mongodb (we had really bad experiences with Mongo, especially when ops tends to increase).
Chose Redis Software
DynamoDB is a fully managed key-value store by Amazon. It provides more powerful indexing to the tables, which certainly increases the performance if searching is what you need. However, it is also a lot more expensive to use compared to Redis. If your use case is more on the …
Chose Redis Software
We evaluated Oracle and at first it seems competitive but after the contract term pricing would jump. Heard this from business associates and online communities
Chose Redis Software
Microsoft SQL requires a lot of resources to run at its optimal performance level. Redis runs faster search queries at a reduced cost.
Chose Redis Software
ElastiCache also offers Redis, but it's quite cryptic and you have to pay for support separately (it's quite expensive as well). With Redis Enterprise we were able to set-up our cluster with constant support from their team, and we were even able to set-up a particular set of …
Chose Redis Software
We initially used Memcached for some of the caching and locking solutions we now use Redis for; we found that for the purposes of our system Memcache could not match up to Redis for performance. We also found Redis to be a bit more reliable, but that could have just been down …
Chose Redis Software
I can't evaluate. I didn't use them personally.
Chose Redis Software
We selected Redis over Memcached because Redis provided more client processing options and better server handling with its computations.
Chose Redis Software
We are big users of MySQL and PostgreSQL. We were looking at replacing our aging web page caching technology and found that we could do it in SQL, but there was a NoSQL movement happening at the time. We dabbled a bit in the NoSQL scene just to get an idea of what it was about …
Chose Redis Software
We initially tried ElastiCache with Redis hosting. While it did the job of running Redis, we still had to deal with server sizing. We switched to Redis Cloud since that had auto-scaling and easy to use tools.
Chose Redis Software
It's cheaper than Microsoft Azure offerings.
Chose Redis Software
We prefer DynamoDB whenever possible. We have more predictable performance at the tail end, better isolation and cheaper costs per GB of storage.
Chose Redis Software
Redshift has relatively high latency and thus produces unscalable solution.
Chose Redis Software
MemSQL is awesome and really fast, but extremely expensive.
Features
RavenDBRedis Software
NoSQL Databases
Comparison of NoSQL Databases features of Product A and Product B
RavenDB
9.1
Ratings
3% above category average
Redis Software
8.6
Ratings
3% below category average
Performance9.00 Ratings9.00 Ratings
Availability8.90 Ratings7.00 Ratings
Concurrency8.00 Ratings9.00 Ratings
Security9.20 Ratings8.00 Ratings
Scalability9.60 Ratings9.00 Ratings
Data model flexibility9.90 Ratings9.00 Ratings
Deployment model flexibility9.40 Ratings9.00 Ratings
Best Alternatives
RavenDBRedis Software
Small Businesses
IBM Cloudant
IBM Cloudant
Score 7.4 out of 10
IBM Cloudant
IBM Cloudant
Score 7.4 out of 10
Medium-sized Companies
IBM Cloudant
IBM Cloudant
Score 7.4 out of 10
IBM Cloudant
IBM Cloudant
Score 7.4 out of 10
Enterprises
IBM Cloudant
IBM Cloudant
Score 7.4 out of 10
IBM Cloudant
IBM Cloudant
Score 7.4 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
RavenDBRedis Software
Likelihood to Recommend
8.1
(0 ratings)
8.0
(0 ratings)
Likelihood to Renew
9.5
(0 ratings)
8.7
(0 ratings)
Usability
8.2
(0 ratings)
9.0
(0 ratings)
Support Rating
8.1
(0 ratings)
8.7
(0 ratings)
Implementation Rating
7.3
(0 ratings)
7.3
(0 ratings)
Configurability
10.0
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
User Testimonials
RavenDBRedis Software
Likelihood to Recommend
RavenDB is very well suited for NoSQL beginners to start easily setting up and using a NoSQL database. Also to set up a high performance and high availability cluster is possible without reading tons of documentation. Very straightforward assistant! The performance is really high.
Read full review
Perfect solution for caching needs. If you have a bottleneck due to frequent data access to your database, then Redis can really help you by diverting those traffic away from your database. Its key/value pair structure also makes data lookup very efficient, providing excellent performance.
Read full review
Pros
  • Document Database - no Object-Relational Impedance Mismatch
  • ACID support that is optimized for performance
  • Can be easily integrated into automated tests (unit tests)
  • Easily configurable via C# code
  • Comes directly with RavenStudio - no SSMS or SQL Developer required
  • In general low footprint when it comes to memory and disk consumption
  • Useful safety nets for new developers - e.g. by default an exception is thrown when you make too many requests within a session
Read full review
  • Easy for developers to understand. Unlike Riak, which I've used in the past, it's fast without having to worry about eventual consistency.
  • Reliable. With a proper multi-node configuration, it can handle failover instantly.
  • Configurable. We primarily still use Memcache for caching but one of the teams uses Redis for both long-term storage and temporary expiry keys without taking on another external dependency.
  • Fast. We process tens of thousands of RPS and it doesn't skip a beat.
Read full review
Cons
  • Developing methods is challenging if developers are unfamiliar with the accurate simulation approach.
  • It does not allow you to replicating, or authorized access without first acquiring a license.
  • The lack of evidence of tracking records in the enterprise systems raises several concerns about RavenDB.
Read full review
  • Redis is super fast but it comes with a cost. Whole dataset resides in RAM. So it can be costly as primary memory is more costly, then secondary ones.
  • Persistence issues: To achieve it, Redis uses a memory dump to create a persistence snapshot, that's cool. But it requires some Linux Kernel tweaking to avoid performance degradation while the Redis server process is forking. This further causes latency.
  • Master-slave structure side effect: Master-slave architecture comes with its own side effects. Please note that there will be only one master with multiple slaves for replication. All writing goes to the master, which creates more load on the master node. So, when the master goes down, the whole architecture does.
Read full review
Likelihood to Renew
We've had an excellent experience using RavenDB. Internally we are testing the newer features in 5.0 such as time series, which will effect the con specified previously dependent on the real world performance. We foresee that BattleCrate will continue to use RavenDB as we grow.
Read full review
We will definitely continue using Redis because: 1. It is free and open source. 2. We already use it in so many applications, it will be hard for us to let go. 3. There isn't another competitive product that we know of that gives a better performance. 4. We never had any major issues with Redis, so no point turning our backs.
Read full review
Usability
Really good .NET client that is very easy to use. The management studio is excellent and puts anything that Microsoft or Oracle have to shame. Very quick to develop with once the complexity hurdle has been overcome. Initially using it can be a bit painful until you fully grasp the event sourced nature of the indexing.
Read full review
It is quite simple to set up for the purpose of managing user sessions in the backend. It can be easily integrated with other products or technologies, such as Spring in Java. If you need to actually display the data stored in Redis in your application this is a bit difficult to understand initially but is possible.
Read full review
Support Rating
Had a question that was answered in minutes. Never used a NoSQL approach before, but was able to be proficient in a matter of hours. Easy to read API Documentation. 5 out 5 support in book, I have never once ran into an issue that wasn't quickly solved by either their support team or myself doing a quick search online.
Read full review
The support team has always been excellent in handling our mostly questions, rarely problems. They are responsive, find the solution and get us moving forward again. I have never had to escalate a case with them. They have always solved our problems in a very timely manner. I highly commend the support team.
Read full review
Implementation Rating
RavenFS changed along the way and made us change the codes.
Read full review
Whitelisting of the AWS lambda functions.
Read full review
Alternatives Considered
RavenDB is just smarter than the competitors. The mapping reduction sorting is head and shoulders above everything else I've used. Nothing really approaches comparable in terms of complexity. Because of the searching of predetermined categories, read efficiency is terrible. RavenDB is a storage system designed for the current websites and functional prototypes. It has an easy-to-use interface and enables quick replication and backup installation. Furthermore, technical assistance responds quickly and walks you through the implementation and deployment procedures.
Read full review
UI isn't that great compared to the other competitors. The management of our memcached cluster was becoming pretty complicated as the application grew in size. Redis is a much better option compared to memcached. Redis is bit unreliable compared to the alternative RabbitMQ especially when it needs to be integrated with Celery.
Read full review
Return on Investment
  • RavenDB has saved my customers a lot of money with their cloud services' tiered model. The database is able to grow with the project/company and can start out small at a low cost.
  • RavenDB is free for three nodes and three CPUs, which makes it great for development scenarios. You're able to start rapidly building applications without having to worry about licensing.
  • Scaling out has allowed us to use three small cloud servers when starting out and get the performance and throughput of a single larger server.
Read full review
  • Existing tools like Redisson that were built over Redis reduced dev time in solving challenging problems, which had a positive impact on ROI.
  • We initially misused Redis for persistent storage which had a negative impact on ROI because we were paying a lot for inactive users.
  • The increased performance we achieved using Redis in areas like locking helped us improve the performance of our system reducing the likelihood of system timeouts.
Read full review
ScreenShots

Redis Software Screenshots

Screenshot of Database configurationScreenshot of Database metricsScreenshot of DatabasesScreenshot of NodesScreenshot of Alerts