When assessing the two solutions, reviewers found CouchDB easier to use and set up. However, Cassandra is easier to administer. Reviewers also preferred doing business with Cassandra overall.
Cassandra runs in a single daemon; there is no complex set of configuration, locking, and other services to get it running. The support for using x.509 certificates and TLS for cluster communication is cloud-friendly (because it doesn't require constant...
Eventual consistency may be difficult to get. You might very likely tap into a host that has not been updated.
The best feature of CouchDB is it's simplicity and use of familiar technology and concepts: - A RESTful API means I can use any language to access it (even using shell and curl). - It plays well in the HTTP-based world with things like proxy servers,...
CouchDB use your all disk if you do not be careful. You index system could be dangerous and freeze you system.
Cassandra runs in a single daemon; there is no complex set of configuration, locking, and other services to get it running. The support for using x.509 certificates and TLS for cluster communication is cloud-friendly (because it doesn't require constant...
The best feature of CouchDB is it's simplicity and use of familiar technology and concepts: - A RESTful API means I can use any language to access it (even using shell and curl). - It plays well in the HTTP-based world with things like proxy servers,...
Eventual consistency may be difficult to get. You might very likely tap into a host that has not been updated.
CouchDB use your all disk if you do not be careful. You index system could be dangerous and freeze you system.