We performed a comparison between Cassandra and ScyllaDB based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two NoSQL Databases solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The technical evaluation is very good."
"Can achieve continuous data without a single downtime because of node to node ring architecture."
"The most valuable features of Cassandra are the NoSQL database, high performance, and zero-copy streaming."
"Our primary use case for the solution is testing."
"We can add almost one million columns to the solution."
"The solution's database capabilities are very good."
"The most valuable features of this solution are its speed and distributed nature."
"I am getting much better performance than relational databases."
"The performance aspects of Scylla are good, as always... A good point about Scylla is that it can be used extensively."
"It is lightweight, and it requires less infrastructure."
"It can be difficult to analyze what's going on inside of the database relative to other databases. It can also be difficult to troubleshoot sometimes."
"Cassandra can improve by adding more built-in tools. For example, if you want to do some maintenance activities in the cluster, we have to depend on third-party tools. Having these tools build-in would be e benefit."
"The initial setup of Cassandra can be difficult in the configuration. There might be a need to have assistance. The implementation process can six months for connecting to certain databases."
"The solution doesn't have joins between tables so you need other tools for that."
"The disc space is lacking. You need to free it up as you are working."
"Cassandra could be more user-friendly like MongoDB."
"The solution is not easy to use because it is a big database and you have to learn the interface. This is the case though in most of these solutions."
"Doesn't support a solution that can give aggregation."
"The documentation of Scylla is an area with shortcomings and needs to be improved."
"Data export, along with how we can purchase the data periodically, needs to be improved so that the storage is within control. Then, we could optimize it even better."
Cassandra is ranked 4th in NoSQL Databases with 19 reviews while ScyllaDB is ranked 6th in NoSQL Databases with 2 reviews. Cassandra is rated 8.0, while ScyllaDB is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Cassandra writes "Well-equipped to handle a massive influx of data and billions of requests". On the other hand, the top reviewer of ScyllaDB writes "A solution that offers good performance and flexibility to its users". Cassandra is most compared with Couchbase, MongoDB, InfluxDB, Oracle NoSQL and Chroma, whereas ScyllaDB is most compared with MongoDB, Couchbase, Apache HBase, Aerospike Database 7 and InfluxDB. See our Cassandra vs. ScyllaDB report.
See our list of best NoSQL Databases vendors.
We monitor all NoSQL Databases reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.