So you think these drawbacks are in someway related to the fact that they are offline? It seems like you are just jumping for a chance to kick a project and or spread some FUD.
Not to mention "database queries can be costly do to transaction over http" => Not gonna get into this too much, but couchdb has an optimistic concurrency model, yeah?
An implementation that uses a technology ( or like iriscouch is a db as a service) is not that technology. If heroku postgresdb's go down because they configure things incorrectly is that the fault of the project? Could be, could be documentation was lacking, or it was a real footgun. It is also possible to deploy technology within a budget where failures are the expected outcome, it is also very possible to deploy technology in a manner which does not support a use case, or may not even be something the technology can support, that does not make it 'bad' or 'great', and has nothing to do with "control vs ease" or http vs a yet to be named wire protocol...
I just don't see how this is helpful, accurate, or adds to the discussion, sorry if I am jumping down your throat about it.
You are a bit, but that's ok, fwiw, I'm speaking from my experience whether it's right or wrong, which I felt had value. I only meant that after using it on several projects, I felt that it had some cool features, but there are quite a few 'gotchas' that come with it. That is, come with thinking it's like any other database, which it's not.
Not to mention "database queries can be costly do to transaction over http" => Not gonna get into this too much, but couchdb has an optimistic concurrency model, yeah?
An implementation that uses a technology ( or like iriscouch is a db as a service) is not that technology. If heroku postgresdb's go down because they configure things incorrectly is that the fault of the project? Could be, could be documentation was lacking, or it was a real footgun. It is also possible to deploy technology within a budget where failures are the expected outcome, it is also very possible to deploy technology in a manner which does not support a use case, or may not even be something the technology can support, that does not make it 'bad' or 'great', and has nothing to do with "control vs ease" or http vs a yet to be named wire protocol...
I just don't see how this is helpful, accurate, or adds to the discussion, sorry if I am jumping down your throat about it.