3 ms·
> Cassandra did not live up to the hype for me because of the complexity Which complexity are you referring to, specifically where CRDB has a better approach?
by bsg75 9y ago
> Cassandra did not live up to the hype for me because of the complexity
Which complexity are you referring to, specifically where CRDB has a better approach?
Interested as we are evaluating both.
- cube2222 9y agoCRDB and Cassandra are to totally different databases. CockroachDB is full SQL ACID database. With transactions, consistent indexes, joins. It's also strongly consistent overall. Cassandra is really just a key-value store, with a hierarchy of sorting keys as part of the key, so that you can do range scans with good performance (and various access patterns). Indexes are asynchronously updated (as far as I know). No transactions nor joins. Its consistency is varying (configurable).
- erikrothoff 9y agoTurns out for Cassandra to work properly you need double the storage space that you max want available, otherwise it can't vacuum properly. So if you want to be able to store 1 TB, you need 2 TB, and if you go over 1 TB, it's not guaranteed to be able to vacuum at all. Also, Apache Cassandra and DataStax Cassandra did a hard split recently, so the docs are no longer in sync, making it a lot harder to search for stuff if you're using Apache Cassandra. Also, patch versions of Cassandra are not guaranteed to be binary compatible (sstables), [so upgrading from 3.0.5 to 3.0.9](https://gist.github.com/shyamsalimkumar/49a61e5bc6f403d20c55#gistcomment-1888706 https://gist.github.com/shyamsalimkumar/49a61e5bc6f403d20c55...)? Expect a long migration.