> The point of the comparison is that InfluxDB gives you a ton of functionality out of the box and has great performance. [...] if you want to do time series o

> The point of the comparison is that InfluxDB gives you a ton of functionality out of the box and has great performance. [...] if you want to do time series on Cassandra, you're going to write a bunch of the code yourself. Fair enough. I'm sure InfluxDB is very good/fast at timeseries data (allthough I have to admit to not actually having tried it out so far). Still, if that was your point, consider removing these statements from the blog. > InfluxDB outperformed Cassandra by 4.5x when it came to data ingestion. > InfluxDB outperformed Cassandra by delivering 10.8x better compression. > InfluxDB outperformed Cassandra by delivering up to 168x better query performance. I think it would help make the point and not put the reader in a defensive position (when the statements are clearly not based on a fair comparison of the two products and will not hold under most conditions). Just my two cents.