Apache Geode vs. IBM Cloudant

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
Apache Geode
Score 7.0 out of 10
N/A
Apache Geode is a distributed in-memory database designed to support low latency, high concurrency solutions, available free and open source since 2002. With it, users can build high-speed, data-intensive applications that elastically meet performance requirements. Apache Geode blends techniques for data replication, partitioning and distributed processing.N/A
IBM Cloudant
Score 7.4 out of 10
N/A
Cloudant is an open source non-relational, distributed database service that requires zero-configuration. It's based on the Apache-backed CouchDB project and the creator of the open source BigCouch project. Cloudant's service provides integrated data management, search, and analytics engine designed for web applications. Cloudant scales your database on the CouchDB framework and provides hosting, administrative tools, analytics and commercial support for CouchDB and BigCouch. Cloudant is often…
$1
per month per GB of storage above the included 20 GB
Pricing
Apache GeodeIBM Cloudant
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
Standard
$1
per month per GB of storage above the included 20 GB
Standard
$75
per month 100 reads/second ; 50 writes/second ; 5 global queries/second
Lite
Free
20 reads/second ; 10 writes/second ; 5 global queries / second ; 1 GB of storage capacity
Standard
Included
per month 20 GB of storage
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Apache GeodeIBM Cloudant
Free Trial
NoYes
Free/Freemium Version
NoYes
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup fee
Additional Details
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Apache GeodeIBM Cloudant
Features
Apache GeodeIBM Cloudant
NoSQL Databases
Comparison of NoSQL Databases features of Product A and Product B
Apache Geode
8.7
Ratings
2% below category average
IBM Cloudant
9.1
Ratings
3% above category average
Performance9.00 Ratings9.70 Ratings
Availability10.00 Ratings8.30 Ratings
Concurrency10.00 Ratings9.80 Ratings
Scalability8.00 Ratings9.00 Ratings
Data model flexibility7.00 Ratings9.80 Ratings
Deployment model flexibility8.00 Ratings9.00 Ratings
Security00 Ratings8.20 Ratings
Best Alternatives
Apache GeodeIBM Cloudant
Small Businesses
IBM Cloudant
IBM Cloudant
Score 7.4 out of 10
Redis Software
Redis Software
Score 8.3 out of 10
Medium-sized Companies
IBM Cloudant
IBM Cloudant
Score 7.4 out of 10
Redis Software
Redis Software
Score 8.3 out of 10
Enterprises
IBM Cloudant
IBM Cloudant
Score 7.4 out of 10
Redis Software
Redis Software
Score 8.3 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
Apache GeodeIBM Cloudant
Likelihood to Recommend
7.0
(0 ratings)
7.0
(0 ratings)
Likelihood to Renew
-
(0 ratings)
7.3
(0 ratings)
Usability
8.0
(0 ratings)
7.7
(0 ratings)
Availability
-
(0 ratings)
8.2
(0 ratings)
Performance
-
(0 ratings)
8.2
(0 ratings)
Support Rating
1.0
(0 ratings)
8.6
(0 ratings)
Online Training
-
(0 ratings)
7.3
(0 ratings)
Implementation Rating
-
(0 ratings)
8.2
(0 ratings)
Configurability
-
(0 ratings)
8.5
(0 ratings)
Product Scalability
-
(0 ratings)
9.6
(0 ratings)
Vendor pre-sale
-
(0 ratings)
9.1
(0 ratings)
User Testimonials
Apache GeodeIBM Cloudant
Likelihood to Recommend
The biggest advantage of using Apache Geode is DB like consistency. So for applications whose data needs to be in-memory, accessible at low latencies and most importantly writes have to be consistent, should use Apache Geode. For our application quite some amount of data is static which we store in MySQL as it can be easily manipulated. But since this data is large R/w from DB becomes expensive. So we started using Redis. Redis does a brilliant job, but with complex data structures and no query like capability, we have to manage it via code. We are experimenting with Apache Geode and it looks promising as now we can query on complex data-structures and get the required data quickly and also updates consistent.
Read full review
IBM Cloudant is the best implementation of CouchDB, or any NoSQL database that you could use if you are looking for a database that can handle extremely rapid writes to a database without having to worry about transactional integrity. IBM Cloudant also abstracts out CouchDB's replication/multi-node requirements and ensures high availability on its own. It also allows map-reduce based indexing which will allow massive databases to be aggregated and queried very quickly. It should not be used in cases where you require structured data which is organized according to a schema, or if you want to maintain ACID database properties.
Read full review
Pros
  • Super Fast data pull/push
  • Provided ACID transactions, so it works like a SQL Database
  • Provides replication & partitioning, so our data is never lost and extraction is super fast. NoSql like properties
Read full review
  • We had a small data mart project that required the storage of some rather highly connected data that also had a relatively small footprint. This made IBM Cloudant an obvious choice because we could store the data in a data structure that met our project need al while using a platform that our web development team understood and was comfortable with.
  • We had a bunch of geospatial data that we needed for analysis. Having GeoJSON being natively supported by Cloudant made it an easy choice.
  • Cloudant was cloud-based and didn't require a DBA support it, this allowed the project to move ahead without pushback from the infrastructure team.
Read full review
Cons
  • Needs more supporting languages. Out of box Python, Nodejs adapters would be wonderful
  • Currently it supports just KV Store. But if we could cache documents or timeseries data would be great
  • Needs more community support, documentation.
Read full review
  • To have a sort of LUW - Logical Unit Work when many documents are involved into a single update process. The changing of one document is related to its status information but it must be synchronized with all the other documents involved in the process.
Read full review
Likelihood to Renew
No answers on this topic
the flexibility of NoSQL allow us to modify and upgrade our apps very fast and in a convenient way. Having the solution hosted by IBM is also giving us the chance to focus on features and the improvement of our apps. It's one thing less to be worried about
Read full review
Usability
Still Experimenting. Initial results are good. we need to figure out if we can completely replace Redis. Cost wise if it makes sense to keep both or replacement is feasible.
Read full review
It's mostly just a straight forward API to a data store. I knock one off for the full text search thing, but I don't need it much anyways. Also, the dashboard UI they give is pretty nice to use. It provides syntax-highlighting for writing views and queries are easy to test. I wish other DBs had a UI like this.
Read full review
Reliability and Availability
No answers on this topic
it is a highly available solution in the IBM cloud portfolio and hence we have never had any issues with the data base being available - we also do continuous replication to be on the safer side just in case some thing goes awry. We also perform twice a year disaster recovery tests.
Read full review
Performance
No answers on this topic
very easy to get started and is very developer friendly given that it uses couchDB analytics. It is a cloud based solution and hence there is no hardware investment in a server and staging the server to get started and the associated delays/bureaucracy involved to get started. Good documentation is also available.
Read full review
Support Rating
Never contacted support
Read full review
Very happy by the commitment given by the team which has been really good over the last 7 years of usage.
Read full review
Online Training
No answers on this topic
online resources are good enough to understand but there is nothing like testing. In our case, we discovered some not documented behavior that we take in count now. Also, the experience in NodeJs is critical. Also, take in count that most of the "good practices" with cloudant are not in online courses but in blogs and pages from independent developers
Read full review
Implementation Rating
No answers on this topic
  • Test the architecture on CouchDB helped us to address initial design flaws.
  • The migration to Cloudant as such was very painless.
  • We have migrate our replication system to Cloudant Android Sync for mobile devices.
  • We have regular informal contact with the Cloudant leadership to discuss our use cases and implementation strategies.
Read full review
Alternatives Considered
Still Experimenting. But looks promising as it has query capabilities over complex data structures
Read full review
MongoDB Atlas and Azure Cosmos DB are the closest competitors we found with Cloudant, especially in terms of fixed pricing and having a GUI for easy viewing and quick edits of data. Cloudant's pricing model flat out beats MongoDB Atlas' in terms of how easy it would be to predict costs. Cosmos DB is a much closer competitor, as it integrates well with Azure's stack similarly to Cloudant and the rest of the IBM Cloud stack; similar [throughout]-based pricing and replication options; and even the GUI and ease of query using SQL, which my team and I were more familiar with. Where Cloudant beats out Cosmos DB is again having a more simple pricing model (ops/sec vs Cosmos' "request units" voodoo) and being based on open-source software assuaging fears of vendor lock-in.
Read full review
Scalability
No answers on this topic
The service scales incredibly well. As you would expect from CloudDB and IBM combination. The only reason I wouldn't score it a 10 is the fact that document trees can get nested and nested very quickly if you are attempting to do very complex datasets. Which makes your code that much more complex to deal. Its very possible we could find a solution to this problem with better database planning to begin with, but one of the reasons we chose a service over a self-hosted solution was so we could set it up quick and forget about it. So we weren't going to dedicate a team to architecture optimization.
Read full review
Return on Investment
  • Still experimenting so difficult to quote
  • For a small size project/teams might be an overkill as it still has certain learning curve
  • For Medium to large projects with complex Data Structures that need to be queried with a fast o/p it definitely works
Read full review
  • Saving in-terms of cost of procuring and maintaining hardware, which will be realized over the next 5 years.
  • Positive ROI in terms of the number of FTEs involved in maintaining our databases; our DBAs can now focus on other important and business critical applications.
  • Best ROI in terms of our organization's vision - they are no longer anxious / nervous to move to the cloud. We are already on the CLOUD.
Read full review
ScreenShots