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."I am getting much better performance than relational databases."
"Can achieve continuous data without a single downtime because of node to node ring architecture."
"Our primary use case for the solution is testing."
"Some of the valued features of this solution are it has good performance and failover."
"A consistent solution."
"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."
"The most valuable features of Cassandra are the NoSQL database, high performance, and zero-copy streaming."
"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."
"Depending upon our schema, we can't make ORDER BY or GROUP BY clauses in the product."
"The solution doesn't have joins between tables so you need other tools for that."
"The secondary index in Cassandra was a bit problematic and could be improved."
"Interface is not user friendly."
"Cassandra could be more user-friendly like MongoDB."
"The solution is limited to a linear performance."
"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."
"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, InfluxDB, MongoDB, Oracle NoSQL and Accumulo, whereas ScyllaDB is most compared with MongoDB, Couchbase, Apache HBase, InfluxDB and Aerospike Database 7. 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.
