3 ms·
I don't think that comparison holds. It's easy to push 50k+ on a single node, you're basically only resource bound on that machine. Pushing 20k+ on something th
by daenney 10y ago
I don't think that comparison holds. It's easy to push 50k+ on a single node, you're basically only resource bound on that machine. Pushing 20k+ on something that's globally consistent spread out over so many instances is a different exercise entirely. It also depends on the level of consistency you're asking from Cassandra. You'd probably need to set this to EACH_QUORUM or ALL to mimic the behaviour Spanner gives you.
And yes Cassandra will scale linearly-ish as long as you're in the same datacenter. Try running a geo-distributed 30-node Cassandra ring and it's a whole different story at that level of consistency and availability.
- ex3ndr 10y agoSure, but you can make geo-replication and even implement proxy for providing consistency across DC, sure it won't be that fast in terms of latency, but throughput will be the same.
- daenney 10y agoHow does this proxy that provides cross-DC consistency work? And how does it guarantee that you'll get globally consistent reads? Most cases I've seen latency can affect throughput plenty so I doubt your assertion that it won't affect throughput quite a bit. Even more so for anything that relies on TCP/IP. I'd highly recommend reading the Bigtable[0] and Spanner[1] papers first and maybe then we can have a sensible and fruitful argument. [0]: https://research.google.com/archive/bigtable.html https://research.google.com/archive/bigtable.html [1]: https://research.google.com/archive/spanner.html https://research.google.com/archive/spanner.html