The Apache HBase project's goal is the hosting of very large tables -- billions of rows X millions of columns -- atop clusters of commodity hardware. Apache HBase is an open-source, distributed, versioned, non-relational database modeled after Google's Bigtable.
N/A
H2 Database
Score 8.0 out of 10
N/A
H2 Database Engine is an open source, embeddable database management system (RDMS) written in Java.
N/A
SAP HANA Cloud
Score 8.9 out of 10
N/A
SAP HANA is an application that uses in-memory database technology to process very large amounts of real-time data from relational databases, both SAP and non-SAP, in a very short time. The in-memory computing engine allows HANA to process data stored in RAM as opposed to reading it from a disk which means that the data can be accessed in real time by the applications using HANA. The product is sold both as an appliance and as a cloud-based software solution.
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.
For running application tests it's well suited. H2 [Database Engine] can replace the real-world database solution for them easily and removes the requirement to set up a a separate database instance just for running unit tests. For using in actual production application one needs to consider scale. H2 is suitable if application runs in single instance and database is located in same machine as a file where that application runs. This means the application shouldn't have a large user base. However it's easy to switch to an actual MySQL instance if the need arises, it's most likely only a configuration change and doesn't require new code.
I think if you have a large organization, it's probably the product and the marketplace to go to. We're a large management consulting firm operating in four to seven countries. And generally speaking, I think that's the size and the scope where it scales best. I can't speak to smaller companies, but I can't see smaller companies leveraging the benefits as much as a larger organization can.
Real-time reporting and analytics on data: because of its in-memory architecture, it is perfect for businesses that need to make quick decisions based on current information.
Managing workload with complex data: it can handle a vast range of data types, including relational, documental, geospatial, graph, vector, and time series data.
Developing and deploying intelligent data applications: it provides various tools for such applications and can be used for machine learning and artificial intelligence to automate tasks, gain insights from data, and make predictions.
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.
Requires higher processing power, otherwise it won't fly. How ever computing costs are lower. Incase you are migrating to cloud please do not select the highest config available in that series . Upgrading it later against a reserved instance can cost you dearly with a series change
Lack of clarity on licensing is one major challenge
Unless S/4 with additional features are enabled mere migration HANA DB is not a rewarding journey. Power is in S/4
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.
We would rate our likelihood of renewing at 9/10. SAP HANA Cloud has proven to be a highly reliable and scalable data platform that consistently delivers strong performance. Its seamless integration with our overall SAP landscape, combined with improved analytics and real-time data capabilities, makes it a core part of our long-term technology strategy.
It is very useful solution which provides you speedier data processing, real-time analytics. It helps you manage diverse data types. It also offers you excellent disaster management. It has user friendly interface which helps you navigate system and transactions easily and perform task smoothly.
However, I am not the right person to answer this as we have another department to handle support and contact the service provider for any support required. Although i will say that they are the quick respondent and knows how to handle querry of the customers and provide quick and better support.
Professional GIS people are some of the most risk-averse there are, and it's difficult to get them to move to HANA in one step. Start with small projects building to 80% use of HANA spatial over time.
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.
While both can run as an in-memory database, H2 Database Engine was just so much easier for us to use since we primarily use the Java stack and H2 Database Engine is also built with Java.
I have deep knowledge of other disk based DBMSs. They are venerable technology, but the attempts to extend them to current architectures belie the fact they are built on 40 year old technology. There are some good columnar in-memory databases but they lack the completeness of capability present in the HANA platform.
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.