Menu
I'm evaluating some database possibilities for a large-scale (many billions of entries, many terabytes of data) storage solution where we will do random primary key-lookups almost exclusively.
Given it's capabilities, Membase (Couchbase 1.8) looks almost like a perfect fit, and some previous tests makes us believe it is highly performant for our usecase. Our main concern with using this though, is that since Couchbase 2.0 looks like a whole new direction from 1.8, the characteristics of the product might change. We like Couchbase 1.8 because it does exactly what we need very well.
We don't need views or map/reduce capabilities. While these are nice features to have, they are not something we need and not something we want if they are at all detrimental to performance. We've ruled out CouchDB mostly due to the complexity in scaling (adding/removing nodes) which is of course much better in Couchbase, but also because we had some concerns about it's disk usage.
Is anyone aware of any performance measurements made for 1.8 vs 2.0, disregarding all view and M/R capabilities?
Will the 1.8 fork continue to be maintained? Or is 1.8 dead, and we should just move on?
910
Couchbase provides Eventual Consistency and Immediate Consistency methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system. CouchDB only provides Immediate Consistency method to ensure consistency in a distributed system.
MongoDB performed better than Couchbase on a 4-node cluster, but lower on 10- and 20-node clusters. Cassandra did not perform so well with 2,570 ops/sec on a 4-node cluster, 4,230 ops/sec on a 10-node cluster, and 6,563 ops/sec on a 20-node cluster.
Yes, customers can use Enterprise Edition free-of-charge for unlimited pre-production development and testing with forum support.
Both Couchbase Server and Apache CouchDB are fully open source projects released under the Apache 2.0 licence. Matthew Revell is a Lead Dev Advocate, EMEA Couchbase. He developed a global strategy for putting Couchbase front in the minds of the product's developers.
One of the most sought-after new features of Couchbase Server 2.0 is the addition of views for indexing/querying your data. As with any new capability, it comes with certain requirements and considerations relating to sizing of the cluster.
If you are not familiar, take a look at our sizing guidelines and calculator. Disk: Keep in mind that upgrading from Couchbase Server 1.8 to 2.0 may require considerably more disk space. From an IO perspective, the append-only disk format will actually read and write data faster and more consistently than 1.8.
A Couchbase strength is its support for a wide range of query functions. Its REST API provides three ways to query: N1QL, a SQL-like query language for JSON; Views, including multi-dimensional querying, similar to CouchDB views; and Key-value lookups, which do not require the creation of any additional indexes.
There will be no major differences in performance between Couchbase 1.8 and 2.0. I am a Couchbase employee and one of the most important things to us was that existing customers are able to upgrade from Couchbase 1.8 to Couchbase 2.0 whether or not views were important to them and have their applications continue to perform at the same levels.
I recommend starting with Couchbase 1.8 since our 2.0 product will not be released until the end of October 2012, but when the time comes to upgrade to 2.0 you shouldn't have any issues.
NOTE: As December 2012, Couchbase 2.0 is already available
60
If you love us? You can donate to us via Paypal or buy me a coffee so we can maintain and grow! Thank you!
Donate Us With
