33 ms·
Right, my intention by pointing out Cloudant wasn't to offer it as a counter-example (I personally have 0 experience with it), but rather to see if anyone might
by lewisl9029 9y ago
Right, my intention by pointing out Cloudant wasn't to offer it as a counter-example (I personally have 0 experience with it), but rather to see if anyone might have some red flags to share, as I'm considering using Cloudant instead of hosting my own CouchDB instances for a new project I'm speccing out, and especially since nobody has mentioned it as a counter-example in this thread so far.
- throwawaybbq1 9y agoDisclaimer: this is a throwaway account, and I used to work for IBM. I like Cloudant .. it is not too bad. In a recent project (after I left IBM), I needed to get a data tier up quickly and I actually used it for the initial POC. And yes, it was an acquisition by IBM. I was a bit worried that bluewashing would have made Cloudant crap but looks like they have managed to avoid it. The caveat I'd suggest is look closely at the pricing model. If you want QoS and scale, be careful of the pricing model. For small projects and projects that need fast completion (what project today doesn't?), it is actually very nice. You asked for caveats .. I think some of the language bindings were a bit out of date .. but since it uses REST calls, it wasn't too hard to bypass.
- doublerebel 9y agoI've been using Cloudant for several years and it's been extremely reliable. Support is good and they have contributed a ton of open source code and docs back to the community. The communication has been transparent throughout the IBM acquisition process so I feel confident in continuing to start new projects on the platform. It's really easy (largely thanks to Cloudant) to host your own Couch instance but it's also really affordable to let them do it.