Likelihood to Recommend Apache Flume is well suited when the use case is log data ingestion and aggregate only, for example for compliance of configuration management. It is not well suited where you need a general-purpose real-time data ingestion pipeline that can receive log data and other forms of data streams (eg IoT, messages).
Read full review Hbase is well suited for large organizations with millions of operations performing on tables, real-time lookup of records in a table, range queries, random reads and writes and online analytics operations. Hbase cannot be replaced for traditional databases as it cannot support all the features, CPU and memory intensive. Observed increased latency when using with MapReduce job joins.
Read full review Pros Multiple sources of data (sources) and destinations (sinks) that allows you to move data form and to any relevant data storage It is very easy to setup and run Very open to personalization, you can create filters, enrichment, new sources and destinations Read full review Scalability. HBase can scale to trillions of records. Fast. HBase is extremely fast to scan values or retrieve individual records by key. HBase can be accessed by standard SQL via Apache Phoenix. Integrated. I can easily store and retrieve data from HBase using Apache Spark. It is easy to set up DR and backups. Ingest. It is easy to ingest data into HBase via shell, Java, Apache NiFi, Storm, Spark, Flink, Python and other means. Read full review Cons It is very specific for log data ingestion so it is pretty hard to use for anything else besides log data Data replication is not built in and needs to be added on top of Apache Flume (not a hard job to do though) Read full review There are very few commands in HBase. Stored procedures functionality is not available so it should be implemented. HBase is CPU and Memory intensive with large sequential input or output access while as Map Reduce jobs are primarily input or output bound with fixed memory. HBase integrated with Map-reduce jobs will result in random latencies. Read full review Likelihood to Renew There's really not anything else out there that I've seen comparable for my use cases. HBase has never proven me wrong. Some companies align their whole business on HBase and are moving all of their infrastructure from other database engines to HBase. It's also open source and has a very collaborative community.
Read full review Support Rating Apache Flume is open-source so support is limited. Never the less, it has great documentation and best practices documents from their end-users so it is not hard to use, setup and configure.
Read full review Alternatives Considered Apache Flume is a very good solution when your project is not very complex at transformation and enrichment, and good if you have an external management suite like Cloudera, Hortonworks, etc. But it is not a real EAI or ETL like AB Initio or Attunity so you need to know exactly what you want. On the other hand being an opensource project give Apache a lot of room to personalize thanks to its plug-able architecture and has a very nice performance having a very low CPU and Memory footprint, a single server can do the job on many occasions, as opposed to the multi-server architecture of paid products.
Read full review Cassandra os great for writes. But with large datasets, depending, not as great as HBASE.
Cassandra does support parquet now. HBase still performance issues.
Cassandra has use cases of being used as time series. HBase, it fails miserably. GeoSpatial data, Hbase does work to an extent. HA between the two are almost the same.
Read full review Return on Investment Flume has simplified a lot many of our ingest procedures, easier to deploy and integrate than a classical EAI, reducing the time to market But opposed to EAIs if the project starts to grow in complexity Apache Flume project may not be as suitable Read full review As Hbase is a noSql database, here we don't have transaction support and we cannot do many operations on the data. Not having the feature of primary or a composite primary key is an issue as the architecture to be defined cannot be the same legacy type. Also the transaction concept is not applicable here. The way data is printed on console is not so user-friendly. So we had to use some abstraction over HBase (eg apache phoenix) which means there is one new component to handle. Read full review ScreenShots