We performed a comparison between CockroachDB and Vertica based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, Oracle, SAP and others in Relational Databases Tools."CockroachDB is highly reliable."
"I use CockroachDB to test big data samples and to create the best structure for databases. We have four users and required 10 people for deployment and maintenance."
"The subset of SQL that my client is using is completely supported."
"The product has valuable security features."
"The initial setup and deployment are simple."
"The best feature of CockroachDB is the ability to keep the nodes in different locations."
"The most valuable features of the solution are its resiliency features and the geo-partitioning capabilities."
"The availability and the easy to use feature is the most valuable. The documentation is also good."
"Vertica gives knowledgeable users and DBAs excellent tools for tuning."
"Bulk loads, batch loads, and micro-batch loads have made it possible for our organization to process near real-time ingestions and faster analytics."
"It has improved my organization's functionality and performance."
"The solution is quick, has good compression data, and is not expensive."
"I like the projection feature, which increases query performance."
"I enjoy the cybersecurity and backup features."
"Vertica is easy to use and provides really high performance, stability, and scalability."
"The most valuable feature of Vertica is the unmatchable database performance."
"The initial setup and pricing could be improved."
"The closer they can make CockroachDB to being completely compatible with Postgres, the better. It's almost compatible, but not completely. If it was, it would be nice to just be able to use Postgres libraries without any fiddling."
"The product must improve its disaster recovery features."
"We are looking for more features to support distributed high availability and geo-partitioning."
"I find the serverless offer a bit confusing."
"CockroachDB needs to improve store processes."
"Cockroach does not support all types of protocols. I need to improve it myself to support a CouchDB on my network."
"The platform could be more extensible."
"The biggest problem is the cost of cloud deployment."
"It's hard to make it slow for a small data volume. For large volumes, it's hard to make it work. It's also hard to make it faster, and to make it scale."
"The documentation of Vertica is an area with shortcomings where improvements are required."
"I would personally like to see extended developer tooling suited to Vertica – think published PowerDesigner SQL dialect support."
"In a future release, we would like to have artificial intelligence capabilities like neural networks. Customers are demanding this type of analytics."
"We are looking for a cheaper deployment for the solution. Although we did a lot of benchmarks, like Redshift. We tried Redshift, it didn't work. It didn't work out for us as well."
"It would be great if this were a managed service in AWS."
"There are a lot of limitations within this product and it makes things extremely hard for developers. It lacks Stored Procedure, packages, and triggers like other RDBMs."
CockroachDB is ranked 9th in Relational Databases Tools with 10 reviews while Vertica is ranked 4th in Data Warehouse with 83 reviews. CockroachDB is rated 8.0, while Vertica is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of CockroachDB writes "Open source with extensive documentation and a University for training". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Vertica writes " A user-friendly tool that needs to improve its documentation part". CockroachDB is most compared with Oracle Database, MySQL, Citus Data, Amazon Aurora and SQL Server, whereas Vertica is most compared with Snowflake, SQL Server, Amazon Redshift, Teradata and Oracle Exadata.
We monitor all Relational Databases Tools reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
