Apache Cassandra vs. HPE Data Fabric

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
Cassandra
Score 9.0 out of 10
N/A
Cassandra is a no-SQL database from Apache.N/A
HPE Data Fabric
Score 9.4 out of 10
N/A
HPE Data Fabric (formerly MapR, acquired by HPE in 2019) is a software-defined datastore and file system that simplifies data management and analytics by unifying data across core, edge, and multicloud sources into a single platform.N/A
Pricing
Apache CassandraHPE Data Fabric
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
CassandraHPE Data Fabric
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 CassandraHPE Data Fabric
Best Alternatives
Apache CassandraHPE Data Fabric
Small Businesses

No answers on this topic

No answers on this topic

Medium-sized Companies
Azure Cosmos DB
Azure Cosmos DB
Score 9.0 out of 10
Azure Cosmos DB
Azure Cosmos DB
Score 9.0 out of 10
Enterprises
Azure Cosmos DB
Azure Cosmos DB
Score 9.0 out of 10
Azure Cosmos DB
Azure Cosmos DB
Score 9.0 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
Apache CassandraHPE Data Fabric
Likelihood to Recommend
6.0
(16 ratings)
7.2
(4 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 CassandraHPE Data Fabric
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
Hewlett Packard Enterprise
MapR is more well-suited for people who know what they are doing. I consider MapR the Hadoop distribution professionals use.
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
Hewlett Packard Enterprise
  • MapR had very fast I/O throughput. The write speed was several times faster than what we could achieve with the other Hadoop vendors (Cloudera and Hortonworks). This is because MapR does not use HDFS, which is essentially a "meta filesystem". HDFS is built on top of the filesystem provided by the OS. MapR has their filesystem called MapR-FS, which is a true filesystem and accesses the raw disk drives.
  • The MapR filesystem is very easy to integrate with other Linux filesystems. When working with HDFS from Apache Hadoop, you usually have to use either the HDFS API or various Hadoop/HDFS command line utilities to interact with HDFS. You cannot use command line utilities native to the host operation system, which is usually Linux. At least, it is not easily done without setting up NFS, gateways, etc. With MapR-FS, you can mount the filesystem within Linux and use the standard Unix commands to manipulate files.
  • The HBase distribution provided by MapR is very similar to the Apache HBase distribution. Cloudera and Hortonworks add GUIs and other various tools on top of their HBase distributions. The MapR HBase distribution is very similar to the Apache distribution, which is nice if you are more accustomed to using Apache HBase.
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
Hewlett Packard Enterprise
  • It takes time to get latest versions of Apache ecosystem tools released as it has to be adapted.
  • When you have issues related to Mapr-FS or Mapr Tables, its hard to figure them out by ourselves.
  • Sometime new ecosystem tools versions are released without proper QA.
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
Hewlett Packard Enterprise
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
Hewlett Packard Enterprise
No answers on this topic
Support Rating
Apache
Sometimes instead giving straight answer, we ‘re getting transfered to talk professional service.
Read full review
Hewlett Packard Enterprise
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
Hewlett Packard Enterprise
I don't believe there is as much support for MapR yet compared to other more widely known 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
Hewlett Packard Enterprise
  • Increased employee efficiency for sure. Our clients have various levels of expertise in their deployment and user teams, and we never receive complaints about MapR.
  • MapR is used by one of our financial services clients who uses it for fraud detection and user pattern analysis. They are able to turn around data much faster than they previously had with in-house applications
Read full review
ScreenShots