Mailing-List: contact user-help@couchdb.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: user@couchdb.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of alexander.uvarov@gmail.com
 designates 209.85.161.52 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=from:mime-version:content-type:subject:date:in-reply-to:to
         :references:message-id:x-mailer;
        b=fawnm1InVIeXSluwiVQRLXg8eyUj1wGfDr7IRgRn5B9QI1tWilo4GQIZ/+zCLX+iiC
         qY4SAxr6p84uXyIGSypOVcLW3LCo/iLDTioplhEns7FAa2QYe7lMbzB8U0EJz4zBsh7a
         urOWIDwK8bpFXmlxuNgS9wDtfIPKgzdm9oiPE=
From: Alexander Uvarov <alexander.uvarov@gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1078)
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=Apple-Mail-1--878569160
Subject: Re: arguments for couchdb ?!
Date: Fri, 14 May 2010 02:09:34 +0600
In-Reply-To: <4BEC5694.2050205@digitalgott.de>
To: user@couchdb.apache.org
References: <AANLkTimb6aZ0PY75tUYoOB1tVcooFfHwjXuQMCDjvHkt@mail.gmail.com>
 <4FD426D8-F807-4FCE-8B98-36B9B0B2C058@googlemail.com>
 <4BEBCDAB.4070708@digitalgott.de>
 <AANLkTikgHoM8publkQ1wWxMaJksZ_0OIEe43cZgFS63W@mail.gmail.com>
 <20100513160136.GB9782@seblaptop> <4BEC2A4C.4090303@digitalgott.de>
 <2C9F0F2E-F87B-4BC7-B55D-7D7A2E965428@googlemail.com>
 <4BEC43B3.8070807@digitalgott.de>
 <5625AF56-BC6C-4C4E-A675-1D47711C97B9@googlemail.com>
 <02D23147-0128-454A-87BF-169CDE6D35CF@gmail.com>
 <4BEC4F33.7060503@digitalgott.de>
 <C4D26E40-B531-440F-BDE0-2AD880D02C7D@gmail.com>
 <4BEC5694.2050205@digitalgott.de>
Message-Id: <3041A366-8876-4C76-89E2-981863C9A3FA@gmail.com>

--Apple-Mail-1--878569160
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset=us-ascii

On 14.05.2010, at 1:44, c.Kleinhuis wrote:

> hi there,
>=20
> is there a comparison between hibernate/spring and couchdb ?
>=20
> to convience my project manager
>=20
> -in my eyes the main benefit of couchdb is that it removes a complete =
application tier,
> the java/server side, which maps objects to tables. the relaxing =
effect :D
>=20
> - here is a performance comparison:
>=20
> =
http://metalelf0dev.blogspot.com/2008/09/mysql-couchdb-performance-compari=
son.html
> it is rather old (2008), and just displays that indexing is a bit =
slower, which shouldnt
> be a problem=20
>=20
> if there are any more arguments, please let me know, also i would like
> to have some examples of HUGE Sites using couchdb,=20
> thx
> ck
>=20

Good:

1. Schema-less is awesome for a lot of applications
2. RESTful JSON store
3. Document attachments
4. Views are fast
5. Full text search "out of the box" with couchdb-lucene

Bad:

1. Does not support transactions and AFAIK there are no plans to =
directly support transactional bulk document API
2. It's impossible to just say "update/delete all people where some =
field LIKE something", but actually not a problem


--Apple-Mail-1--878569160--