[Lazare]

Seems a lot like CouchDB/PouchDB. Which makes the fact that the words "couch" and "pouch" do not appear anywhere on this page rather concerning to me, because the obvious questions I have are:

1. How is this better than CouchDB

2. How does this differ from CouchDB

3. Why did you not implement this on top of CouchDB

The lack of mention suggests the developers either have no clue what already exists, know that their solution can't compete with existing solutions, or don't really care about being better and are just having fun implementing their own system from scratch. None of those answers make me want to take a deeper look.

[marknadal]

You are right, it is very similar to Couch/PouchDB. Honestly, I tried Couch back in 2010 and wasn't very impressed and haven't really kept up with it since. Although I regularly hear good things about it and am aware it is one of the rare ones that is offline first. MongoDB wound up winning that market, so I didn't really think to provide a comparison to Couch.

So pardon my out-of-date ignorance:

1. Depends upon what you want. GUN can do dynamic queries and has realtime push notifications baked right in. What you didn't ask is how GUN is worse. Well, CouchDB is stable and has security - stuff which we're still working on.

2. GUN is a graph database which allows you to have key-value, relational, and document based data. Couch is a document based database. GUN gets embedded into your application server, while CouchDB has to run its own database server which then requires maintenance.

3. Mathematically speaking, any matrix (table) or tree (document) can be represented in a graph. But not all graphs can be represented as a matrix or tree. So building GUN ontop of CouchDB would have come with a lot of overhead, especially since CouchDB does not have dynamic queries.

Hope this helps! Let me know if you have any other questions.