What users are saying about

HBase vs SingleStore (formerly MemSQL)

HBase
32 Ratings
SingleStore (formerly MemSQL)
<a href='https://www.trustradius.com/static/about-trustradius-scoring#question3' target='_blank' rel='nofollow noopener'>Customer Verified: Read more.</a>
Top Rated
45 Ratings
Try SingleStore Free

HBase

32 Ratings
<a href='https://www.trustradius.com/static/about-trustradius-scoring' target='_blank' rel='nofollow noopener'>trScore algorithm: Learn more.</a>
Score 7.5 out of 100

Based on 32 reviews and ratings

SingleStore (formerly MemSQL)

<a href='https://www.trustradius.com/static/about-trustradius-scoring#question3' target='_blank' rel='nofollow noopener'>Customer Verified: Read more.</a>
Top Rated
45 Ratings
<a href='https://www.trustradius.com/static/about-trustradius-scoring' target='_blank' rel='nofollow noopener'>trScore algorithm: Learn more.</a>
Score 9 out of 100

Based on 45 reviews and ratings

Try SingleStore Free

Feature Set Ratings

    NoSQL Databases

    7.7

    HBase

    77%

    SingleStore (formerly MemSQL)

    Feature Set Not Supported
    N/A
    Apache HBase ranks higher in 7/7 features
    Apache HBase ranks higher in 7/7 features

    Performance

    7.1
    71%
    5 Ratings
    N/A
    0 Ratings

    Availability

    7.8
    78%
    5 Ratings
    N/A
    0 Ratings

    Concurrency

    7.0
    70%
    5 Ratings
    N/A
    0 Ratings

    Security

    7.8
    78%
    5 Ratings
    N/A
    0 Ratings

    Scalability

    8.6
    86%
    5 Ratings
    N/A
    0 Ratings

    Data model flexibility

    7.1
    71%
    5 Ratings
    N/A
    0 Ratings

    Deployment model flexibility

    8.2
    82%
    5 Ratings
    N/A
    0 Ratings

    Attribute Ratings

    • SingleStore (formerly MemSQL) is rated higher in 2 areas: Likelihood to Recommend, Likelihood to Renew

    Likelihood to Recommend

    7.7

    HBase

    77%
    10 Ratings
    9.0

    SingleStore (formerly MemSQL)

    90%
    33 Ratings

    Likelihood to Renew

    7.9

    HBase

    79%
    10 Ratings
    10.0

    SingleStore (formerly MemSQL)

    100%
    3 Ratings

    Usability

    HBase

    N/A
    0 Ratings
    7.6

    SingleStore (formerly MemSQL)

    76%
    6 Ratings

    Performance

    HBase

    N/A
    0 Ratings
    9.4

    SingleStore (formerly MemSQL)

    94%
    6 Ratings

    Support Rating

    HBase

    N/A
    0 Ratings
    7.7

    SingleStore (formerly MemSQL)

    77%
    6 Ratings

    Likelihood to Recommend

    HBase

    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

    Vinaybabu Raghunandha Naidu | TrustRadius Reviewer
    Vinaybabu Raghunandha Naidu
    View all 10 answers on this topic

    SingleStore (formerly MemSQL)

    SingleStore environment is easy to adapt, it is extremely fast on collecting data from different sources (AWS, GCP or Azure), provides monitoring of activities and easy use multiple databases. It is good for analytical and recommendation based scenarios, and provides fast results on complex queries. In SingleStore platform queries execution open new tab result for each run, which makes it difficult to navigate over the results.

    Read full review

    Anonymous | TrustRadius Reviewer
    Verified User
    View all 33 answers on this topic

    Pros

    HBase

    • 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

    Timothy Spann | TrustRadius Reviewer
    Timothy Spann
    View all 10 answers on this topic

    SingleStore (formerly MemSQL)

    • Return results of complex queries scanning TBs of data in sub-seconds.
    • Customer support team answer tickets quickly and provide guidance.
    • MySQL engine which allows to query using simple MySQL drivers from different clients.
    • Queries profiling is easy to use and helps investigating performance.

    Read full review

    Anonymous | TrustRadius Reviewer
    Verified User
    View all 33 answers on this topic

    Cons

    HBase

    • 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

    RAVI MISHRA | TrustRadius Reviewer
    RAVI MISHRA
    View all 10 answers on this topic

    SingleStore (formerly MemSQL)

    • We wish the product had better support for High Availability of the aggregator. Currently the indexes generated by the two different aggregators are not in the same sequential space and so our apps have more burden to deal with HA.
    • More tools for debugging issues such as high memory usage would be good.
    • The price was the one that kept us away from purchasing for the first few years. Now we are able to afford due to a promotion that gives it at 25% of the list price. Not sure if we'll continue after the promotion offer expires in another 2 years.

    Read full review

    Anonymous | TrustRadius Reviewer
    Verified User
    View all 33 answers on this topic

    Pricing Details

    HBase

    General

    Free Trial
    —
    Free/Freemium Version
    —
    Premium Consulting/Integration Services
    —
    Entry-level set up fee?
    No

    Starting Price

    —

    HBase Editions & Modules

    —
    Additional Pricing Details
    —

    SingleStore (formerly MemSQL)

    General

    Free Trial
    Yes
    Free/Freemium Version
    Yes
    Premium Consulting/Integration Services
    Yes
    Entry-level set up fee?
    Optional

    Starting Price

    $69 per hour

    SingleStore (formerly MemSQL) Editions & Modules

    Edition
    OnDemand0.691
    1. per hour
    Additional Pricing Details
    —

    Likelihood to Renew

    HBase

    HBase 7.9
    Based on 10 answers
    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

    Anonymous | TrustRadius Reviewer
    Verified User
    View all 10 answers on this topic

    SingleStore (formerly MemSQL)

    SingleStore (formerly MemSQL) 10.0
    Based on 3 answers
    We haven't seen a faster relation database. Period. Which is why we are super happy customers and will for sure renew our license.

    Read full review

    Anonymous | TrustRadius Reviewer
    Verified User
    View all 3 answers on this topic

    Usability

    HBase

    No score
    No answers yet
    No answers on this topic

    SingleStore (formerly MemSQL)

    SingleStore (formerly MemSQL) 7.6
    Based on 6 answers
    [Until it is] supported on AWS ECS containers, I will reserve a higher rating for SingleStore. Right now it works well on EC2 and serves our current purpose, [but] would look forward to seeing SingleStore respond to our urge of feature in a shorter time period with high quality and security.

    Read full review

    Anonymous | TrustRadius Reviewer
    Verified User
    View all 6 answers on this topic

    Performance

    HBase

    No score
    No answers yet
    No answers on this topic

    SingleStore (formerly MemSQL)

    SingleStore (formerly MemSQL) 9.4
    Based on 6 answers
    It seems good at being able to handle complex queries against large datasets out of the box. In the past, we've had to do quite a bit of manual configuration and database performance-tuning, but SingleStore (so far) has seemed to require minimal configuration in this aspect. Both data imports/exports, as well as queries against the data, run very fast.

    Read full review

    Ruslan Smirnov | TrustRadius Reviewer
    Ruslan Smirnov
    View all 6 answers on this topic

    Support Rating

    HBase

    No score
    No answers yet
    No answers on this topic

    SingleStore (formerly MemSQL)

    SingleStore (formerly MemSQL) 7.7
    Based on 6 answers
    Very responsive to trouble tickets - Often, I think, the SingleStore's monitoring systems have already alerted the engineers by the time I get around to writing a ticket (about 10 - 20 mins after we see a problem). I feel like things are escalated nicely and SingleStore takes resolving trouble tickets seriously. Also SingleStore follows up after incidents to with a post mortem and actionable takaways to improve the product. Very satisfied here.

    Read full review

    John Barry | TrustRadius Reviewer
    John Barry
    View all 6 answers on this topic

    Alternatives Considered

    HBase

    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

    Anson Abraham | TrustRadius Reviewer
    Anson Abraham
    View all 10 answers on this topic

    SingleStore (formerly MemSQL)

    Vertica, Snowflake, SQL Server, Azure Data Warehouse, PowerBI, Aerospike, etc.From what I've seen MemSQL is well worth the cost when latency and data freshness needs are high, i.e. you need a lot of queries to run with UI latency (the query itself takes less than a second or so), with very fresh streaming fact and dimensional data. It will be more expensive per "unit of performance" but if you need that performance then it'll get the job done.
    • On-prem Vertica (note, not Eon) provides more knobs for optimizing a particular data set and set of queries against it and performs as well or better in a single table, fact table queries. It will also scale to data size more cheaply due to its on-disk model. For large queries against large data sets where data freshness isn't as important (and latency either is or isn't), I'd take Vertica, although if you need to do a lot of joins that will struggle). However, as they still are exclusively columnar, dimension table updates, and recalls based on them, can only be tuned to happen so fast (we could do much better than 10 seconds with 10-100 updates per second for raw replication, and Vertica's joins are always slow so recalls were worse).
    • Snowflake suffers similarly to Vertica in the data freshness, replication, and re-calc area; SF also doesn't give as many knobs to turn as Vertica for data set optimization but seems to be better at joins. If you have a lot of queries to run against a lot of data and joins are limited, you need query latency low and consistent but you don't need a ton of freshness, I'd stick with Vertica. If joins matter more, or you can accept notably-but-not-terribly worse performance, then Snowflake is fine and cheaper from what we've seen. (Again, I can't speak to SF vs Vertica Eon).
    • SQL Server and ADW we couldn't get to perform as well as the other options, but I'll say we didn't try that hard on those.
    • Aerospike is amazing as a KV store; however for OLAP use cases where you want to balance performance against the flexibility of queries against general event (time series) data (i.e. be able to roll up to different grains) then KV becomes challenging.
    • PBI is great if you want an integrated BI tool, but if you want an OLAP solution to build against, with some particular scale or performance needs to be mentioned above, I'd go with one of these other solutions. It really can be great for letting non-tech folks build relatively small data sets and quick insights for customers (internal or external), great leverage in that case.

    Read full review

    Anonymous | TrustRadius Reviewer
    Verified User
    View all 33 answers on this topic

    Return on Investment

    HBase

    • 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

    Bharadwaj (Brad) Chivukula | TrustRadius Reviewer
    Bharadwaj (Brad) Chivukula
    View all 10 answers on this topic

    SingleStore (formerly MemSQL)

    • As the overall performance and functionality were expanded, we are able to deliver our data much faster than before, which increases the demand for data.
    • Metadata is available in the platform by default, like metadata on the pipelines. Also, the information schema has lots of metadata, making it easy to load our assets to the data catalog.

    Read full review

    Anonymous | TrustRadius Reviewer
    Verified User
    View all 33 answers on this topic

    Screenshots

    HBase

    —

    Add comparison