Google Cloud SQL vs. Scylla

Does what it promises well, for instance, as a sidecar for the main enterprise data warehouse. However, I would not recommend using it as the main data warehouse, particularly due to the heavy business logic, as other dedicated tools are more suitable for ensuring scalable operations in terms of change management and multi-developer adjustments.

Incentivized

Scylla is well suited for high-throughput scenarios where keyed data must be read or written with consistently low latency. It's less appropriate for use cases requiring relational queries, secondary indexes, or more structured data sets.

• It has a easily and user understandable interface which provides it every necessary feature to come up with.
• It's backend is very strong that can help us to run big quieres without any hesitation.
• It's integration with other tools are one of the powerful feature which makes it more suitable to use.

Incentivized

• Low-latency reads
• CQL has a familiar syntax
• Parity with Cassandra
• Practical features

• Increasing support for more database engines may enable a wider range of application needs to be met.
• Implementing and updating cutting-edge security features on a constant basis.
• Streamlining and enhancing the tools for transferring data to Google Cloud SQL from on-premises databases or other cloud providers.

• Better documentation for best practices (e.g., how to effectively use connection pooling)

It fits the current needs and bandwith of out lean organization.

Incentivized

As with other cloud tools, users must learn a new terminology to navigate the various tools and configurations, and understand Google Cloud's configuration structure to perform even the most basic operations. So the learning curve is quite steep, but after a few months, it gets easier to maintain.

Incentivized

Very easy-to-understand syntax--uses CQL (same as Cassandra), which has many similarities to standard SQL. There are some gotchas, however, that must be known during schema development.

GCP support in general requires a support agreement. For small organizations like us, this is not affordable or reasonable. It would help if Google had a support mechanism for smaller organizations. It was a steep learning curve for us because this was our first entry into the cloud database world. Better documentation also would have helped.

Incentivized

The Scylla cloud support team is incredibly responsive and proactive.

Unlike other products, Google Cloud SQL has very flexible features that allow it to be selected for a free trial account so that the product can be analyzed and tested before purchasing it. Integration capabilities with most of the web services tools are easier regarding Google Cloud SQL with its nature and support.

Incentivized

Scylla has a quick learning curve (same as Cassandra) compared to other proprietary solutions like BigTable. It supports higher throughput and lower latency that other NoSQL databases like MongoDB, which sacrifice those features for more flexibility and unique features.

• Improved integration with Google Cloud, we have set up some automations with Google Workspace, and we have noticed that the raw data sharing between them is very fast as compared to using some other managed database, not sure why.
• Due to some downtime during maintenance, we had to set up a relatively small service which ingested the data while this went down and dumped it when it came back up. So this was a negative impact on our ROI, since now we had to remedy this downtime against the same profit margins
• It was cheaper than the legacy aws service since we needed large database instances

Incentivized

• Addresses latency requirements of our platform