>> Imho replication with attachments – typed blobs – is main feature. > This makes no sense. Riak has that too.
No, it does not. 1) Typed blobs in Riak are just objects, not attachments to objects 2) They have limits – blobs larger than 50Mb are not recommended (in real life I‘d say reasonable limit for Riak blob is about 10-20 Mb) We see now that nearly any kind of complex OS ‘document’ – I mean files – is a container, that encloses several resources and meta, describing how to glue them together. So nowadays documents, that are represented using files, are often containers – but for most databases DB records in general are not. The only exeption is CouchDB – and this feature is unique as far as I know. Overhead you gain trying to glue several objects in one entity is generally enormous. Replicating these entities is a challenge – but not with CouchDB. For my clients I demonstrate this difference comparing ‘file’ and ‘email’. (‘Just imagine you need to send new email for every attach, bla-bla-bla’). Anyone even technically dumb catches difference in a second. ermouth 2015-05-06 20:15 GMT+03:00 Jan Lehnardt <j...@apache.org>: > > > On 06 May 2015, at 19:03, ermouth <ermo...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >>> CouchDB’s core feature is geographically distributed replication. > > > >> Really? That's the argument that lead to CouchBase. > > > > I think Jan just forgot to say ‘with attachments’. Attachments are really > > important, if CouchDB had no attachments, I‘d better use couchbase. > > > > Imho replication with attachments – typed blobs – is main feature. Not > > replication per se. > > This makes no sense. Riak has that too. Replication is *THE* defining > feature of CouchDB. > > Not any single person’s pet feature (mine happens to be the _changes > feed). > > Best > Jan > -- > > > > > ermouth > > -- > Professional Support for Apache CouchDB: > http://www.neighbourhood.ie/couchdb-support/ > >
