On Wed, Apr 21, 2010 at 12:56 PM, Soichi Hayashi <hayas...@indiana.edu>wrote:
> So, I am interested in using Cassandra not because of large amount of data, > but because of following reasons. > > 1) It's easy to administrate and handle fail-over (and scale, of course) > 2) Easy to write an application that makes sense to developers (Developers' > fully in control of how data is orchestrated - indexed, queried, etc..) > 3) Easy to expand an application to some extend - as long as changes only > applies to adding /removing new column (not column family..) > > Are these good enough reasons to start experimenting with Cassandra as a > general purpose data store? Or Cassandra, or any NOSQL solution really makes > no sense if you don't have or expect to have TB of data? > You don't need a good reason to experiment, go for it! Those are all accurate points in Cassandra's favor. There are many potential arguments about actually adopting such a solution for production use, but personally if I didn't have or foresee scalability or availability problems Cassandra would not be my choice. > For bullet 3) above.. If I have 100 nodes that runs Cassandra, and want to > add a new table (..ColumnFamily) does that mean I have to update storage.xml > on all 100 nodes and restart them? Currently, yes. You can do a rolling restart, so the cluster remains up the whole time, but the nodes would need to be restarted. However, 0.7 will include https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-44 (live schema updates), and this problem will finally go away.
