Apache Cassandra vs. MySQL

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
Cassandra
Score 7.8 out of 10
N/A
Cassandra is a no-SQL database from Apache.N/A
MySQL
Score 8.3 out of 10
N/A
MySQL is a popular open-source relational and embedded database, now owned by Oracle.N/A
Pricing
Apache CassandraMySQL
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
CassandraMySQL
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 CassandraMySQL
Considered Both Products
Cassandra
Chose Apache Cassandra
Cassandra is the only NoSQL database I have extensive experience with. In terms of other open source database solutions, I can say that I like Cassandra as much or equally as traditional Oracle MySQL, and a lot more than PostgresSQL. The decision to use Cassandra was driven by …
Chose Apache Cassandra
Technology selection should be done based on the need and not based on buzz words in the market (google searching). If your data need flat file approach and more searchable based on index and partition keys, then it's better to go for Cassandra. Cassandra is a better choice …
Chose Apache Cassandra

These are the features which makes Cassandra different from others:

  • Cassandra is a distributed datastore, with a built-in coordinator. This means that requests are intelligently forwarded to the correct node.
  • It is generally very fast, and especially shines with write heavy …
Chose Apache Cassandra
We also evaluated mySQL and mongoDB. Both of them have their strengths and weaknesses but they are less suited for storing massive amounts of time series data. In addition, they are not elastic by nature and we required a "future-proof" solution as it was difficult to estimate …
MySQL
Chose MySQL
Of course compare to no SQL databases it's slower but there is a completely different use case for them... In my opinion it is better than PostgreSQL, it's easier to configure and has the same performance, or approximately the same. Of course Oracle Database is a way bigger …
Chose MySQL
Comparing MongoDB vs MySQL performance is difficult, since both management systems are extremely useful and the core differences underly their basic operations and initial approach. However, MongoDB vs MySQL is a hot argument that has been going on for a while now: mature …
Chose MySQL
We have used Oracle and DB2 and both of them are used to store huge amount of data. MySQL is used for reporting purposes in our organization.
Chose MySQL
Oracle is very mature and best in its class. However the cost is much higher. MySQL is a good alternative option.
Chose MySQL
If you are looking for a relational database (depending on your app), MySQL is a good place to start. MongoDB and Cassandra are NoSQL options (very powerful). I am more inclined towards PostgreSQL as it's more scalable over time. MySQL was bought by Oracle and the community …
Top Pros
Top Cons
Features
Apache CassandraMySQL
NoSQL Databases
Comparison of NoSQL Databases features of Product A and Product B
Apache Cassandra
8.0
5 Ratings
9% below category average
MySQL
-
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 CassandraMySQL
Small Businesses
IBM Cloudant
IBM Cloudant
Score 8.4 out of 10
Redis™*
Redis™*
Score 9.0 out of 10
Medium-sized Companies
IBM Cloudant
IBM Cloudant
Score 8.4 out of 10
Redis™*
Redis™*
Score 9.0 out of 10
Enterprises
IBM Cloudant
IBM Cloudant
Score 8.4 out of 10
Redis™*
Redis™*
Score 9.0 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
Apache CassandraMySQL
Likelihood to Recommend
6.0
(16 ratings)
8.2
(134 ratings)
Likelihood to Renew
8.6
(16 ratings)
9.9
(4 ratings)
Usability
7.0
(1 ratings)
10.0
(6 ratings)
Support Rating
7.0
(1 ratings)
8.6
(2 ratings)
Implementation Rating
7.0
(1 ratings)
8.0
(1 ratings)
User Testimonials
Apache CassandraMySQL
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
Oracle
From my own perspective and the tasks that I perform on a daily basis, MySQL is perfect. It has a reasonable footprint, is fast enough and offers the security and flexibility I need. Everyone has their preferred applications and, no doubt, for larger data warehouses or more intensive applications, MySQL may have its limits, but for the area that I operate in, it's a great match.
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
Oracle
  • Security: is embedded at each level in MySQL. Authentication mechanisms are in place for configuring user access and even service account access to applications. MySQL is secure enough under the hood to store your sensitive information. Also, additional plugins are available that sit on top of MySQL for even tighter security.
  • Widely adopted: MySQL is used across the industry and is trusted the most. Therefore, if you face any problems, simply Google it and you shall land in plenty of forums. This is a great relief as when you are in a need of help, you can find it right in your browser.
  • Lightweight application: MySQL is not a heavy application. However, the data you store in the database can get heavy with time, but as in the configuration and MySql application files, those are not very heavy and can easily be installed on legacy systems as well.
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
Oracle
  • Although you can add the data you require as more and more data is added, the fixity of it becomes more critical.
  • As the demand, size, and use of the system increase, you may also need to change or acquire more equipment on your servers, although this is an internal inconvenience for the company.
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
Oracle
For teaching Databases and SQL, I would definitely continue to use MySQL. It provides a good, solid foundation to learn about databases. Also to learn about the SQL language and how it works with the creation, insertion, deletion, updating, and manipulation of data, tables, and databases. This SQL language is a foundation and can be used to learn many other database related concepts.
Read full review
Usability
Apache
It’s great tool but it can be complicated when it comes administration and maintenance.
Read full review
Oracle
I give MySQL a 9/10 overall because I really like it but I feel like there are a lot of tech people who would hate it if I gave it a 10/10. I've never had any problems with it or reached any of its limitations but I know a few people who have so I can't give it a 10/10 based on those complaints.
Read full review
Support Rating
Apache
Sometimes instead giving straight answer, we ‘re getting transfered to talk professional service.
Read full review
Oracle
The support staff is friendly, knowledgeable, and efficient. I only had to get part way through my explanations before they had a solution. They will walk you through a fix or actually connect in and fix the problem for you--or would if you can allow it. I've done it both ways with them. They are always forthcoming with 'how to do this if it happens again' information. I love working with MySQL support.
Read full review
Implementation Rating
Apache
No answers on this topic
Oracle
1. Estimate your data size. 2. Test, test, and test.
Read full review
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
Oracle
MongoDB has a dynamic schema for how data is stored in 'documents' whereas MySQL is more structured with tables, columns, and rows. MongoDB was built for high availability whereas MySQL can be a challenge when it comes to replication of the data and making everything redundant in the event of a DR or outage.
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
Oracle
  • As it is an open source solution through community solution, we can use it in a multitude of projects without cost license
  • The acquisition by Oracle makes you need to contract support for the enterprise version
  • If you have knowledge about oracle databases, you can get more out of the enterprise version
Read full review
ScreenShots