Hi! I just want to add my personal opinion to this point: > (1) Ease of use > Cassandra does not require any other software. All nodes of Cassandra have > the same role. Pretty easy. > On the other hand, HBase requires HDFS and ZooKeeper. Users have to > manipulate and manage HDFS and ZooKeeper. The nodes in the cluster have > various roles, and the users need to design the placement of different types > of nodes.
I evaluated Cassandra and HBase for a particular problem domain and found that Cassandra is a huge pain in the a... in terms of API. Actually, I think it comes directly from hell to punish developers... there are already so many wrappers around for that reason! Anyway - I agree that Cassandra is super easy to setup up in a distributed mode. It can be done within minutes without almost any knowledge about it. On the other hand HBase takes a lot of time set-up, configure, troubleshoot, ... . I also think that the documentation, in terms of structure and presentation, is not that great. Actually they even reference to some external ressources like blogs, that describe HBase internals. From my point of view thats a big big minus for HBase that they don't have an out-of-the-box experiences. BUT, after some while it is realistic to master HBase and gain some understanding and *** I love the API ***!!! /SJ ----------- http://uncinuscloud.blogspot.com/
