RavenDB vs. ScyllaDB

If you're a.NET developer searching for a system other than SQL Server for business assessment, then you must try RavenDB. RavenDB is a fantastic document-oriented system that has been specifically developed to work with all.NET or Windows systems. Developers are continually working on such systems to eliminate their flaws while also providing a few benefits. We must refresh ourselves on a regular basis since the free software system is like an open area where anybody may stand up with a brilliant solution to the issue. RavenDB is absolutely worth a look

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.

• Document Database - no Object-Relational Impedance Mismatch
• ACID support that is optimized for performance
• Can be easily integrated into automated tests (unit tests)
• Easily configurable via C# code
• Comes directly with RavenStudio - no SSMS or SQL Developer required
• In general low footprint when it comes to memory and disk consumption
• Useful safety nets for new developers - e.g. by default an exception is thrown when you make too many requests within a session

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

• The documentation is very good, but it's sometimes hard to find the topic I'm looking for.
• Updating references is done manually. It would be nice if there was a feature to help with that. I'm not sure that's even possible though.

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

We've had an excellent experience using RavenDB. Internally we are testing the newer features in 5.0 such as time series, which will effect the con specified previously dependent on the real world performance. We foresee that BattleCrate will continue to use RavenDB as we grow.

Really good .NET client that is very easy to use. The management studio is excellent and puts anything that Microsoft or Oracle have to shame. Very quick to develop with once the complexity hurdle has been overcome. Initially using it can be a bit painful until you fully grasp the event sourced nature of the indexing.

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.

The support is really fast and flexible. Since one single working day, we got a response to our first request, only 4 days later we got a technical demonstration for our complete developer team to get in touch with raven and its performance. Also during our development, we got a quick response to questions.

The Scylla cloud support team is incredibly responsive and proactive.

RavenFS changed along the way and made us change the codes.

The given alternatives are also powerful and really good noSQL databases but the highest availability of RavenDB allows me/us to know it a lot better. RavenDB is encrypted by default wherever we use it in production and it has a high level of documents compression.

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.

• RavenDB has saved my customers a lot of money with their cloud services' tiered model. The database is able to grow with the project/company and can start out small at a low cost.
• RavenDB is free for three nodes and three CPUs, which makes it great for development scenarios. You're able to start rapidly building applications without having to worry about licensing.
• Scaling out has allowed us to use three small cloud servers when starting out and get the performance and throughput of a single larger server.

• Addresses latency requirements of our platform