You are totally right. I'm far from being an expert on the subject, but the
comparison felt inconsistent and incomplete. (I could not express that in my
1st email, not to bias the opinion)
Do you know of any similar comparison, which is not biased towards some
particular technology or solution? (so not coming from
http://cassandra.apache.org/)
I want to understand how superior is Cassandra in its latest release against
closer competitors, ideally with the opinion from expert guys.
On Wed, Dec 28, 2011 at 12:14 AM, Edward Capriolo <edlinuxg...@gmail.com> wrote:
This is not really a comparison of anything because each NoSQL has its own
bullet points like:
Boats
great for traveling on water
Cars
great for traveling on land
So the conclusion I should gather is?
Also as for the Cassandra bullet points, they are really thin (and wrong).
Such as:
Cassandra:
Best used: When you write more than you read (logging). If every component
of the system must be in Java. ("No one gets fired for choosing Apache's
stuff.")
I view that as:
Nonsensical, inaccurate, and anecdotal.
Also I notice on the other side (and not trying to pick on hbase, but)
hbase:
No single point of failure
Random access performance is like MySQL
Hbase has several SPOF's, its random access performance is definitely NOT
'like mysql',
Cassandra ACTUALLY has no SPOF but as they author mentions, he/she does not
like Cassandra so that fact was left out.
From what I can see of the writeup, it is obviously inaccurate in numerous
places (without even reading the entire thing).
Also when comparing these technologies very subtle differences in design
have profound in effects in operation and performance. Thus someone trying to
paper over 6 technologies and compare them with a few bullet points is really
doing the world an injustice.
On Tue, Dec 27, 2011 at 5:01 PM, Igor Lino <icampi...@gmx.de> wrote:
Hi!
I was trying to get an understanding of the real strengths of Cassandra
against other competitors. Its actually not that simple and depends a lot on
details on the actual requirements.
Reading the following comparison:
http://kkovacs.eu/cassandra-vs-mongodb-vs-couchdb-vs-redis
It felt like the description of Cassandra painted a limiting picture of
its capabilities. Is there any Cassandra expert that could improve that
summary? is there any important thing missing? or is there a more fitting
common use case for Cassandra than what Mr. Kovacs has given?
(I believe/think that a Cassandra expert can improve that generic
description)
Thanks,
Igor
