YugaByte is also another new dancer in the Cassandra dance. The data store is based on RocksDB — and it’s written in C++. Although they ar wire compliant with c* I’m pretty are everything under the hood is NOT a port like Scylla was initially.
Rahul Singh Chief Executive Officer m 202.905.2818 Anant Corporation 1010 Wisconsin Ave NW, Suite 250 Washington, D.C. 20007 We build and manage digital business technology platforms. On Aug 29, 2018, 10:05 AM -0400, Durity, Sean R <sean_r_dur...@homedepot.com>, wrote: > If you are going to compare vs commercial offerings like Scylla and CosmosDB, > you should be looking at DataStax Enterprise. They are moving more quickly > than open source (IMO) on adding features and tools that enterprises really > need. I think they have some emerging tech for large/dense nodes, in > particular. The ability to handle different data model types (Graph and > Search) and embedded analytics sets it apart from plain Cassandra. Plus, they > have replaced Cassandra’s SEDA architecture to give it a significant boost in > performance. As a customer, I see the value in what they are doing. > > > Sean Durity > From: onmstester onmstester <onmstes...@zoho.com> > Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2018 7:43 AM > To: user <user@cassandra.apache.org> > Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: Re: bigger data density with Cassandra 4.0? > > Could you please explain more about (you mean slower performance in compare > to Cassandra?) > ---Hbase tends to be quite average for transactional data > > and about: > ----ScyllaDB IDK, I'd assume they just sorted out streaming by learning from > C*'s mistakes. > While ScyllaDB is a much younger project than Cassandra with so much less > usage and attention, Currently I encounter a dilemma on launching new > clusters which is: should i wait for Cassandra community to apply all > enhancement's and bug fixes that applied by their main competitors (Scylla DB > or Cosmos DB) or just switch to competitors (afraid of the new world!)? > For example right now is there a motivation to handle more dense nodes in > near future? > > Again, Thank you for your time > > Sent using Zoho Mail > > > ---- On Wed, 29 Aug 2018 15:16:40 +0430 kurt greaves <k...@instaclustr.com> > wrote ---- > > > quote_type > > Most of the issues around big nodes is related to streaming, which is > > currently quite slow (should be a bit better in 4.0). HBase is built on top > > of hadoop, which is much better at large files/very dense nodes, and tends > > to be quite average for transactional data. ScyllaDB IDK, I'd assume they > > just sorted out streaming by learning from C*'s mistakes. > > > > On 29 August 2018 at 19:43, onmstester onmstester <onmstes...@zoho.com> > > wrote: > > > > > quote_type > > > > > > Thanks Kurt, > > > Actually my cluster has > 10 nodes, so there is a tiny chance to stream a > > > complete SSTable. > > > While logically any Columnar noSql db like Cassandra, needs always to > > > re-sort grouped data for later-fast-reads and having nodes with big > > > amount of data (> 2 TB) would be annoying for this background process, > > > How is it possible that some of these databases like HBase and Scylla db > > > does not emphasis on small nodes (like Cassandra do)? > > > > > > Sent using Zoho Mail > > > > > > > > > ============ Forwarded message ============ > > > From : kurt greaves <k...@instaclustr.com> > > > To : "User"<user@cassandra.apache.org> > > > Date : Wed, 29 Aug 2018 12:03:47 +0430 > > > Subject : Re: bigger data density with Cassandra 4.0? > > > ============ Forwarded message ============ > > > > > > > quote_type > > > > My reasoning was if you have a small cluster with vnodes you're more > > > > likely to have enough overlap between nodes that whole SSTables will be > > > > streamed on major ops. As N gets >RF you'll have less common ranges > > > > and thus less likely to be streaming complete SSTables. Correct me if > > > > I've misunderstood. > > > > > > > > The information in this Internet Email is confidential and may be legally > privileged. It is intended solely for the addressee. Access to this Email by > anyone else is unauthorized. If you are not the intended recipient, any > disclosure, copying, distribution or any action taken or omitted to be taken > in reliance on it, is prohibited and may be unlawful. When addressed to our > clients any opinions or advice contained in this Email are subject to the > terms and conditions expressed in any applicable governing The Home Depot > terms of business or client engagement letter. The Home Depot disclaims all > responsibility and liability for the accuracy and content of this attachment > and for any damages or losses arising from any inaccuracies, errors, viruses, > e.g., worms, trojan horses, etc., or other items of a destructive nature, > which may be contained in this attachment and shall not be liable for direct, > indirect, consequential or special damages in connection with this e-mail > message or its attachment.
