Apache Cassandra vs. Apache Derby

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
Cassandra
Score 7.5 out of 10
N/A
Cassandra is a no-SQL database from Apache.N/A
Apache Derby
Score 7.0 out of 10
N/A
Apache Derby is an embedded relational database management system, originally developed by IBM and called IBM Cloudscape.N/A
Pricing
Apache CassandraApache Derby
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
CassandraApache Derby
Free Trial
NoNo
Free/Freemium Version
NoNo
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup fee
Additional Details
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Apache CassandraApache Derby
Top Pros
Top Cons
Features
Apache CassandraApache Derby
NoSQL Databases
Comparison of NoSQL Databases features of Product A and Product B
Apache Cassandra
8.0
5 Ratings
9% below category average
Apache Derby
-
Ratings
Performance8.55 Ratings00 Ratings
Availability8.85 Ratings00 Ratings
Concurrency7.65 Ratings00 Ratings
Security8.05 Ratings00 Ratings
Scalability9.55 Ratings00 Ratings
Data model flexibility6.75 Ratings00 Ratings
Deployment model flexibility7.05 Ratings00 Ratings
Best Alternatives
Apache CassandraApache Derby
Small Businesses
IBM Cloudant
IBM Cloudant
Score 8.4 out of 10
SQLite
SQLite
Score 9.0 out of 10
Medium-sized Companies
IBM Cloudant
IBM Cloudant
Score 8.4 out of 10
SQLite
SQLite
Score 9.0 out of 10
Enterprises
IBM Cloudant
IBM Cloudant
Score 8.4 out of 10
SQLite
SQLite
Score 9.0 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
Apache CassandraApache Derby
Likelihood to Recommend
6.0
(16 ratings)
7.0
(3 ratings)
Likelihood to Renew
8.6
(16 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Usability
7.0
(1 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Support Rating
7.0
(1 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Implementation Rating
7.0
(1 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
User Testimonials
Apache CassandraApache Derby
Likelihood to Recommend
Apache
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
Apache
If you need a SQL-capable database-like solution that is file-based and embeddable in your existing Java Virtual Machine processes, Apache Derby is an open-source, zero cost, robust and performant option. You can use it to store structured relational data but in small files that can be deployed right alongside with your solution, such as storing a set of relational master data or configuration settings inside your binary package that is deployed/installed on servers or client machines.
Read full review
Pros
Apache
  • 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
Apache
  • Apache Derby is SMALL. Compared to an enterprise scale system such as MSSQL, it's footprint is very tiny, and it works well as a local database.
  • The SPEED. I have found that Apache Derby is very fast, given the environment I was developing in.
  • Based in JAVA (I know that's an obvious thing to say), but Java allows you to write some elegant Object Oriented structures, thus allowing for fast, Agile test cases against the database.
  • Derby is EASY to implement and can be accessed from a console with little difficulty. Making it appropriate for everything from small embedded systems (i.e. just a bash shell and a little bit of supporting libraries) to massive workstations.
Read full review
Cons
Apache
  • 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
Apache
  • It may not scale as well as some more mature database products.
  • Used it primarily from the command line with openjpa and jdbc, and from third-party clients such as Squirrel.
  • May benefit by providing more sophisticated tools to optimize query performance.
Read full review
Likelihood to Renew
Apache
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
Apache
No answers on this topic
Usability
Apache
It’s great tool but it can be complicated when it comes administration and maintenance.
Read full review
Apache
No answers on this topic
Support Rating
Apache
Sometimes instead giving straight answer, we ‘re getting transfered to talk professional service.
Read full review
Apache
No answers on this topic
Alternatives Considered
Apache
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
Apache
SQLite is another open-source zero-cost file-based SQL-capable database solution and is a good alternative to Apache Derby, especially for non-Java-based solutions. We chose Apache Derby as it is Java-based, and so is the solution we embedded it in. However, SQLite has a similar feature set and is widely used in the industry to serve the same purposes for native solutions such as C or C++-based products.
Read full review
Return on Investment
Apache
  • 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
Apache
  • Being Open source, the resources spent on the purchase of the product are ZERO.
  • Contrary to popular belief, open source software CAN provide support, provided that the developers/contributors are willing to answer your emails.
  • Overall, the ROI was positive: being able to experiment with an open source technology that could perform on par with the corporate products was promising, and gave us much information about how to proceed in the future.
Read full review
ScreenShots