Apache Cassandra vs. ClickHouse

Cassandra excels in a broad range of applications -- especially if you understand its data model and write your applications accordingly. It's an excellent choice for time-series data, and a poor choice for application queues. It performs the best if you can simply record history and compute from it, rather than going back and editing or deleting things a lot.

Incentivized

ClickHouse delivers exceptional speed and performance, positioning it as the top choice for managing large-scale analytical workloads. With a bunch of built-in functions, it empowers analysts to extract maximum insights from data effortlessly. If your scenario is to deal with analytical questions, then ClickHouse is for you, but if you are looking into a transactional database, that's not the case; even their table engines are not made for this.

Incentivized

• High Availability - we utilize the data replication features of Cassandra. This enables us to access our data even when several nodes have gone down
• Data Locality - our architecture combines Cassandra storage nodes and computation nodes in the same machine. This enables us to utilize data locality and limit expensive network IO to read data.
• Elasticity - Cassandra is a shared nothing architecture. Nodes can be added very easily and they discover the network topology. As soon as a node has joined the Cassandra ring, the data is redistributed among the existing nodes and streamed to it automatically.

Incentivized

• Their MergeTree table engine provide impressive performance for data insert in bulk
• Not only data insert but also the way MergeTree engine uses Primary Keys to sort the data and perform data skipping based on the granules its also their secret for ridiculous fast queries
• Data compression its also great
• They provide especial table engines that allow you to read data directly from other sources like S3
• Since its written with C++ you have very granular data types and especial ones like enum, LowCardinality and etc, they save you a lot of storage since are stored as integer values
• ClickHouse functions besides the ones that respect ANSI Standards are also awesome and useful

Incentivized

• No Ad-Hoc Queries: Cassandra data storage layer is basically a key-value storage system. This means that you must "model" your data around the queries you want to surface, rather than around the structure of the data itself.
• There are no aggregations queries available in Cassandra.
• Not fit for transactional data.

Incentivized

• Avro data manipulation
• Kafka consistency
• DDL operations errors (by replica configuration)

Incentivized

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.

Incentivized

It’s great tool but it can be complicated when it comes administration and maintenance.

Incentivized

Sometimes instead giving straight answer, we ‘re getting transfered to talk professional service.

Incentivized

Apache Cassandra has the best of both worlds, it is a Java based NoSQL, linearly scalable, best in class
tunable performance across different workloads, fault tolerant, distributed, masterless, time series database. We have used both Apache HBase and MongoDB for some use cases which were within hadoop setup and JSON (JavaScript Object Notation) document store respectively, but given the overall factors favoring Apache Cassandra, it is a technology choice for multiple platforms!

Incentivized

ClickHouse was not compared to them as a competitor but as the ideal partner to complete an information analysis system, providing users with the most complete and efficient tools. Therefore, in this case it was considered that it would be the ideal candidate due to its characteristics compared to the other competitors.

Incentivized

• The open source version of Cassandra is only suggested for learning the basic concepts and play with its core features. Unless you really want to invest a lot in your developers and architects knowing every detail of Cassandra, I prefer the DataStax enterprise version. Although the license cost is relatively high, I think they it is worth it. I'm thinking about the support, the monitoring tool OpsCenter, and the integration of Solr and Spark (for data analysis).
• Cassandra didn't fully replace our old and traditional relation database Oracle. In addition, it opens another door for us to deal with some special business use cases that NoSQL database can do better in a more feasible and efficient way.

Incentivized

• Queries that used to take more than 2 minutes now take less than 1 second
• Possibility to analyze use cases in real time (before was impossible)
• The applications are more complete and the users decisions are better

Incentivized