Likelihood to Recommend Apache Cassandra is a NoSQL database and well suited where you need highly available, linearly scalable, tunable consistency and high performance across varying workloads. It has worked well for our use cases, and I shared my experiences to use it effectively at the last Cassandra summit!
http://bit.ly/1Ok56TK It is a NoSQL database, finally you can tune it to be strongly consistent and successfully use it as such. However those are not usual patterns, as you negotiate on latency. It works well if you require that. If your use case needs strongly consistent environments with semantics of a relational database or if the use case needs a data warehouse, or if you need NoSQL with ACID transactions, Apache Cassandra may not be the optimum choice.
Read full review if you're doing joins from hBASE, hdfs, cassandra and redis, then this works. Using it as a be all end all does not suit it. This is not your straight forward magic software that works for all scenarios. One needs to determine the use case to see if Apache Drill fits the needs. 3/4 of the time, usually it does.
Read full review Pros Continuous availability: as a fully distributed database (no master nodes), we can update nodes with rolling restarts and accommodate minor outages without impacting our customer services. Linear scalability: for every unit of compute that you add, you get an equivalent unit of capacity. The same application can scale from a single developer's laptop to a web-scale service with billions of rows in a table. Amazing performance: if you design your data model correctly, bearing in mind the queries you need to answer, you can get answers in milliseconds. Time-series data: Cassandra excels at recording, processing, and retrieving time-series data. It's a simple matter to version everything and simply record what happens, rather than going back and editing things. Then, you can compute things from the recorded history. Read full review queries multiple data sources with ease. supports sql, so non technical users who know sql, can run query sets 3rd party tools, like tableau, zoom data and looker were able to connect with no issues Read full review Cons Cassandra runs on the JVM and therefor may require a lot of GC tuning for read/write intensive applications. Requires manual periodic maintenance - for example it is recommended to run a cleanup on a regular basis. There are a lot of knobs and buttons to configure the system. For many cases the default configuration will be sufficient, but if its not - you will need significant ramp up on the inner workings of Cassandra in order to effectively tune it. Read full review deployment. Not as easy configuration isn't as straight forward, especially with the documentation Garbage collection could be improved upon Read full review Likelihood to Renew I would recommend Cassandra DB to those who know their use case very well, as well as know how they are going to store and retrieve data. If you need a guarantee in data storage and retrieval, and a DB that can be linearly grown by adding nodes across availability zones and regions, then this is the database you should choose.
Read full review if Presto comes up with more support (ie hbase, s3), then its strongly possible that we'll move from apache drill to prestoDB. However, Apache drill needs more configuration ease, especially when it comes to garbage collection tuning. If apache drill could support also sparkSQL and
Flume , then it does change drill into being something more valuable than prestoDB
Read full review Usability It’s great tool but it can be complicated when it comes administration and maintenance.
Read full review Support Rating Sometimes instead giving straight answer, we ‘re getting transfered to talk professional service.
Read full review Alternatives Considered We evaluated
MongoDB also, but don't like the single point failure possibility. The
HBase coupled us too tightly to the Hadoop world while we prefer more technical flexibility. Also
HBase is designed for "cold"/old historical data lake use cases and is not typically used for web and mobile applications due to its performance concern. Cassandra, by contrast, offers the availability and performance necessary for developing highly available applications. Furthermore, the Hadoop technology stack is typically deployed in a single location, while in the big international enterprise context, we demand the feasibility for deployment across countries and continents, hence finally we are favor of Cassandra
Read full review compared to presto, has more support than prestodb. Impala has limitations to what drill can support apache phoenix only supports for hbase. no support for cassandra. Apache drill was chosen, because of the multiple data stores that it supports htat the other 3 do not support. Presto does not support hbase as of yet. Impala does not support query to cassandra
Read full review Return on Investment I have no experience with this but from the blogs and news what I believe is that in businesses where there is high demand for scalability, Cassandra is a good choice to go for. Since it works on CQL, it is quite familiar with SQL in understanding therefore it does not prevent a new employee to start in learning and having the Cassandra experience at an industrial level. Read full review Configuration has taken some serious time out. Garbage collection tuning. is a constant hassle. time and effort applied to it, vs dedicating resources elsewhere. w/ sql support, reduces the need of devs to generate the resultset for analysts, when they can run queries themselves (if they know sql). Read full review ScreenShots