On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 3:04 AM, Aklin_81 <asdk...@gmail.com> wrote: > But so far what I have seen, it's something very different with Cassandra. > People usually recommend starting out with atleast a 3 node cluster, (on > dedicated servers) with lots & lots of RAM. 4GB or 8GB RAM is what they > suggest to start with. So is it that Cassandra requires more hardware > resources in comparison to MySQL, for a website to deliver similar > performance, serve similar load/ traffic & same amount of data. I > understand about higher storage requirements of Cassandra due to > replication but what about other hardware resources ? >
If you have enough data to fit on a single computer, or two computers, and only need one or two copies of it for redundancy/availability... you probably don't have enough data to need something like Cassandra. Vertically scaling RDBMS or in-memory k/v stores to significant size is a tried and true technique. If you may eventually have more data than can fit on a single very powerful computer, Cassandra or something like it may be indicated. It really starts to shine once you have N>=3, because then you can have RF>=3, which allows you to use QUORUM reads and writes for consistency. But because Cassandra is designed for horizontal scaling (and because it runs in the JVM...) it is natural that it will slightly underperform from the perspective of vertical scaling. =Rob
