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."Cassandra has some features that are more useful for specific use cases where you have time series where you have huge amounts of writes. That should be quick, but not specifically the reads. We needed to have quicker reads and writes and this is why we are using Cassandra right now."
"A consistent solution."
"The time series data was one of the best features along with auto publishing."
"The technical evaluation is very good."
"I am getting much better performance than relational databases."
"The most valuable features of Cassandra are the NoSQL database, high performance, and zero-copy streaming."
"Some of the valued features of this solution are it has good performance and failover."
"The use of Cassandra in real-time data analytics has been pivotal for our e-commerce platform. As our platform operates 24/7, providing services to sellers and customers alike, the need for real-time updates is paramount."
"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."
"Doesn't support a solution that can give aggregation."
"Depending upon our schema, we can't make ORDER BY or GROUP BY clauses in the product."
"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 solution is limited to a linear performance."
"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."
"The secondary index in Cassandra was a bit problematic and could be improved."
"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 DataStax, 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.
