I am aware of no benchmark that shows the binary driver to be faster then thrift. Yes. Theoretically a driver that with multiplex *should be* faster in *some* cases. However I have never seen any evidence to back up this theory anecdotal or otherwise.
In fact.... https://github.com/pchalamet/cassandra-sharp/pull/24 On Sun, May 5, 2013 at 4:09 PM, Derek Williams <de...@fyrie.net> wrote: > The binary protocol is able to multiplex multiple requests using a single > connection, which can lead to much better performance (similar to HTTP vs > SPDY). This is without comparing the performance of thrift vs binary > protocol, which I assume the binary protocol would be faster since it is > specialized for cassandra requests. > > > On Sun, May 5, 2013 at 12:14 PM, Renato Marroquín Mogrovejo < > renatoj.marroq...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Hey Shamim, >> >> Why do you say that Java-Driver has better performance over Hector or >> Astyanax? Is there any reasons for this? >> Thanks. >> >> >> Renato M. >> >> 2013/5/5 Shamim <sre...@yandex.ru>: >> > Hi, >> > Astyanax is just a refactoring of Hector and implements a few common >> cassandra use cases. Very easy to use api. In Astyanax you will found all >> the functions from hector. For better performance you can also check >> datastax java driver https://github.com/datastax/java-driver. >> > >> > There are another lightweight client from twitter >> https://github.com/twitter/cassie >> > >> > -- >> > Best regards >> > Shamim A. >> > >> > 05.05.2013, 05:30, "李 晗" <bjb...@me.com>: >> >> hello， >> >> i want to know which cassandra client is better？ >> >> and what are their advantages and disadvantages？ >> >> >> >> thanks >> > > > > -- > Derek Williams >
