Need advice about which tool to choose?Ask the StackShare community!
Couchbase vs Hadoop: What are the differences?
Introduction: When comparing Couchbase and Hadoop, it is essential to understand the key differences between these two popular data management systems.
Data Model: Couchbase is a NoSQL database that uses a key-value pair data model, providing flexibility and scalability for applications handling unstructured data. In contrast, Hadoop is a distributed data processing framework that is designed for storing and processing large volumes of structured and unstructured data in a distributed computing environment.
Architecture: Couchbase follows a master-slave architecture where each node can act as a master or a slave, allowing for high availability and fault tolerance. On the other hand, Hadoop follows a distributed architecture with a master node (NameNode) that manages the file system namespace and data blocks across the DataNodes.
Querying: Couchbase supports querying with N1QL (SQL for JSON), allowing users to query JSON documents using SQL-like syntax. In contrast, Hadoop relies on MapReduce as its primary processing model, which involves writing custom Map and Reduce functions in Java.
Real-time Processing: Couchbase is optimized for real-time processing and low-latency access to data, making it suitable for applications requiring quick data retrieval and processing. Hadoop, on the other hand, is more suitable for batch processing and analyzing large datasets in a parallel and distributed manner.
Use Case: Couchbase is commonly used for real-time web and mobile applications that require fast data access and low latency, such as e-commerce platforms and gaming applications. Hadoop, on the other hand, is used for big data processing, analytics, and data warehousing applications where large volumes of structured and unstructured data need to be processed and analyzed efficiently.
Scalability: Couchbase provides built-in horizontal scalability through its sharding capabilities, allowing users to distribute data across multiple nodes easily. Hadoop also offers horizontal scalability by adding more commodity hardware to the cluster, enabling users to store and process massive amounts of data efficiently.
In Summary, the key differences between Couchbase and Hadoop lie in their data models, architectures, querying methods, real-time processing capabilities, use cases, and scalability options.
For a property and casualty insurance company, we currently use MarkLogic and Hadoop for our raw data lake. Trying to figure out how snowflake fits in the picture. Does anybody have some good suggestions/best practices for when to use and what data to store in Mark logic versus Snowflake versus a hadoop or all three of these platforms redundant with one another?
for property and casualty insurance company we current Use marklogic and Hadoop for our raw data lake. Trying to figure out how snowflake fits in the picture. Does anybody have some good suggestions/best practices for when to use and what data to store in Mark logic versus snowflake versus a hadoop or all three of these platforms redundant with one another?
As i see it, you can use Snowflake as your data warehouse and marklogic as a data lake. You can add all your raw data to ML and curate it to a company data model to then supply this to Snowflake. You could try to implement the dw functionality on marklogic but it will just cost you alot of time. If you are using Aws version of Snowflake you can use ML spark connector to access the data. As an extra you can use the ML also as an Operational report system if you join it with a Reporting tool lie PowerBi. With extra apis you can also provide data to other systems with ML as source.
Hey, we want to build a referral campaign mechanism that will probably contain millions of records within the next few years. We want fast read access based on IDs or some indexes, and isolation is crucial as some listeners will try to update the same document at the same time. What's your suggestion between Couchbase and MongoDB? Thanks!
I am biased (work for Scylla) but it sounds like a KV/wide column would be better in this use case. Document/schema free/lite DBs data stores are easier to get up and running on but are not as scalable (generally) as NoSQL flavors that require a more rigid data model like ScyllaDB. If your data volumes are going to be 10s of TB and transactions per sec 10s of 1000s (or more), look at Scylla. We have something called lightweight transactions (LWT) that can get you consistency.
I have found MongoDB highly consistent and highly available. It suits your needs. We usually trade off partion tolerance fot this. Having said that, I am little biased in recommendation as I haven't had much experience with couchbase on production.
I have a lot of data that's currently sitting in a MariaDB database, a lot of tables that weigh 200gb with indexes. Most of the large tables have a date column which is always filtered, but there are usually 4-6 additional columns that are filtered and used for statistics. I'm trying to figure out the best tool for storing and analyzing large amounts of data. Preferably self-hosted or a cheap solution. The current problem I'm running into is speed. Even with pretty good indexes, if I'm trying to load a large dataset, it's pretty slow.
Druid Could be an amazing solution for your use case, My understanding, and the assumption is you are looking to export your data from MariaDB for Analytical workload. It can be used for time series database as well as a data warehouse and can be scaled horizontally once your data increases. It's pretty easy to set up on any environment (Cloud, Kubernetes, or Self-hosted nix system). Some important features which make it a perfect solution for your use case. 1. It can do streaming ingestion (Kafka, Kinesis) as well as batch ingestion (Files from Local & Cloud Storage or Databases like MySQL, Postgres). In your case MariaDB (which has the same drivers to MySQL) 2. Columnar Database, So you can query just the fields which are required, and that runs your query faster automatically. 3. Druid intelligently partitions data based on time and time-based queries are significantly faster than traditional databases. 4. Scale up or down by just adding or removing servers, and Druid automatically rebalances. Fault-tolerant architecture routes around server failures 5. Gives ana amazing centralized UI to manage data sources, query, tasks.
We Have thousands of .pdf docs generated from the same form but with lots of variability. We need to extract data from open text and more important - from tables inside the docs. The output of Couchbase/Mongo will be one row per document for backend processing. ADOBE renders the tables in an unusable form.
I prefer MongoDB due to own experience with migration of old archive of pdf and meta-data to a new “archive”. The biggest advantage is speed of filters output - a new archive is way faster and reliable then the old one - but also the the easy programming of MongoDB with many code snippets and examples available. I have no personal experience so far with Couchbase. From the architecture point of view both options are OK - go for the one you like.
I would like to suggest MongoDB or ArangoDB (can't choose both, so ArangoDB). MongoDB is more mature, but ArangoDB is more interesting if you will need to bring graph database ideas to solution. For example if some data or some documents are interlinked, then probably ArangoDB is a best solution.
To process tables we used Abbyy software stack. It's great on table extraction.
If you can select text with mouse drag in PDF. Use pdftotext it is fast! You can install it on server with command "apt-get install poppler-utils". Use it like "pdftotext -layout /path-to-your-file". In same folder it will make text file with line by line content. There is few classes on git stacks that you can use, also.
After using couchbase for over 4 years, we migrated to MongoDB and that was the best decision ever! I'm very disappointed with Couchbase's technical performance. Even though we received enterprise support and were a listed Couchbase Partner, the experience was horrible. With every contact, the sales team was trying to get me on a $7k+ license for access to features all other open source NoSQL databases get for free.
Here's why you should not use Couchbase
Full-text search Queries The full-text search often returns a different number of results if you run the same query multiple types
N1QL queries Configuring the indexes correctly is next to impossible. It's poorly documented and nobody seems to know what to do, even the Couchbase support engineers have no clue what they are doing.
Community support I posted several problems on the forum and I never once received a useful answer
Enterprise support It's very expensive. $7k+. The team constantly tried to get me to buy even though the community edition wasn't working great
Autonomous Operator It's actually just a poorly configured Kubernetes role that no matter what I did, I couldn't get it to work. The support team was useless. Same lack of documentation. If you do get it to work, you need 6 servers at least to meet their minimum requirements.
Couchbase cloud Typical for Couchbase, the user experience is awful and I could never get it to work.
Minimum requirements
The minimum requirements in production are 6 servers. On AWS the calculated monthly cost would be ~$600
. We achieved better performance using a $16
MongoDB instance on the Mongo Atlas Cloud
writing queries is a nightmare While N1QL is similar to SQL and it's easier to write because of the familiarity, that isn't entirely true. The "smart index" that Couchbase advertises is not smart at all. Creating an index with 5 fields, and only using 4 of them won't result in Couchbase using the same index, so you have to create a new one.
Couchbase UI
The UI that comes with every database deployment is full of bugs, barely functional and the developer experience is poor. When I asked Couchbase about it, they basically said they don't care because real developers use SQL directly from code
Consumes too much RAM
Couchbase is shipped with a smaller Memcached instance to handle the in-memory cache. Memcached ends up using 8 GB of RAM for 5000 documents
! I'm not kidding! We had less than 5000 docs on a Couchbase instance and less than 20 indexes and RAM consumption was always over 8 GB
Memory allocations are useless I asked the Couchbase team a question: If a bucket has 1 GB allocated, what happens when I have more than 1GB stored? Does it overflow? Does it cache somewhere? Do I get an error? I always received the same answer: If you buy the Couchbase enterprise then we can guide you.
We implemented our first large scale EPR application from naologic.com using CouchDB .
Very fast, replication works great, doesn't consume much RAM, queries are blazing fast but we found a problem: the queries were very hard to write, it took a long time to figure out the API, we had to go and write our own @nodejs library to make it work properly.
It lost most of its support. Since then, we migrated to Couchbase and the learning curve was steep but all worth it. Memcached indexing out of the box, full text search works great.
Pros of Couchbase
- High performance18
- Flexible data model, easy scalability, extremely fast18
- Mobile app support9
- You can query it with Ansi-92 SQL7
- All nodes can be read/write6
- Equal nodes in cluster, allowing fast, flexible changes5
- Both a key-value store and document (JSON) db5
- Open source, community and enterprise editions5
- Automatic configuration of sharding4
- Local cache capability4
- Easy setup3
- Linearly scalable, useful to large number of tps3
- Easy cluster administration3
- Cross data center replication3
- SDKs in popular programming languages3
- Elasticsearch connector3
- Web based management, query and monitoring panel3
- Map reduce views2
- DBaaS available2
- NoSQL2
- Buckets, Scopes, Collections & Documents1
- FTS + SQL together1
Pros of Hadoop
- Great ecosystem39
- One stack to rule them all11
- Great load balancer4
- Amazon aws1
- Java syntax1
Sign up to add or upvote prosMake informed product decisions
Cons of Couchbase
- Terrible query language3