ALL COVERED TOPICS

NoSQL Benchmarks NoSQL use cases NoSQL Videos NoSQL Hybrid Solutions NoSQL Presentations Big Data Hadoop MapReduce Pig Hive Flume Oozie Sqoop HDFS ZooKeeper Cascading Cascalog BigTable Cassandra HBase Hypertable Couchbase CouchDB MongoDB OrientDB RavenDB Jackrabbit Terrastore Amazon DynamoDB Redis Riak Project Voldemort Tokyo Cabinet Kyoto Cabinet memcached Amazon SimpleDB Datomic MemcacheDB M/DB GT.M Amazon Dynamo Dynomite Mnesia Yahoo! PNUTS/Sherpa Neo4j InfoGrid Sones GraphDB InfiniteGraph AllegroGraph MarkLogic Clustrix CouchDB Case Studies MongoDB Case Studies NoSQL at Adobe NoSQL at Facebook NoSQL at Twitter

NAVIGATE MAIN CATEGORIES

Close
Wednesday, 7 April 2010
‹ Back

Why CouchDB?

About:
,

A funny way to emphasize some advantages of CouchDB:

  • Erlang is Spooky: CouchDB, written in Erlang is honestly spooky. With an up time of 8 months and memory utilization of 0.1%, we think it’s actually survived a few power outages too!
  • Lack of JOINs kills the brain: The whole Map/Reduce thing ruins everything and puts the brain in sleep mode for the most time.
  • What’s up with this JavaScript anyways?: We want our typed languages back!
  • No more SQL injection: NoSQL obviously means no more SQL injection and this just puts an end to all web app scanners.

Objectively speaking though, while any of these can be considered nice to haves, I don’t think they are the reasons for choosing CouchDB. And except the funny approach, we’ve seen some similar arguments before.

via: http://labs.mudynamics.com/2010/04/01/why-nosql-is-bad-for-startups/