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 most valuable features of Cassandra are the NoSQL database, high performance, and zero-copy streaming."
"I am getting much better performance than relational databases."
"I am satisfied with the performance."
"The most valuable features are the counter features and the NoSQL schema. It also has good scalability. You can scale Cassandra to any finite level."
"Cassandra is good. It's better than CouchDB, and we are using it in parallel with CouchDB. Cassandra looks better and is more user-friendly."
"The technical evaluation is very good."
"Our primary use case for the solution is testing."
"We can add almost one million columns to the solution."
"It is lightweight, and it requires less infrastructure."
"The performance aspects of Scylla are good, as always... A good point about Scylla is that it can be used extensively."
"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."
"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."
"The secondary index in Cassandra was a bit problematic and could be improved."
"Depending upon our schema, we can't make ORDER BY or GROUP BY clauses in the product."
"Fine-tuning was a bit of a challenge."
"The solution is limited to a linear performance."
"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."
"Maybe they can improve their performance in data fetching from a high volume of data sets."
"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."
"The documentation of Scylla is an area with shortcomings and needs to be improved."
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.