4 ms·

Sorry but this is just nonsense. Cassandra with PlayORM/Astyanax has been the easiest database for me to install, use and manage out of the 10+ I've tried. Far

Sorry but this is just nonsense. Cassandra with PlayORM/Astyanax has been the easiest database for me to install, use and manage out of the 10+ I've tried. Far simpler to install/manage than MySQL Cluster or Riak, far easier to use than PostgreSQL and infinitely better to scale than MongoDB. You don't have to understand ColumnFamilies, consistency or the different topology strategies. The defaults are fine and if you are a Java developer life couldn't possibly be simpler.

3amOpsGuy 14y ago
If you don't understand the implications of eventual consistency, you're heading for a fall. It's not a trivial topic and unfortunately "it appears to work as you'd expect" on a small dev cluster which can lead to statements like yours. Your parent's post is actually very very accurate.
- taligent 14y ago
  I am not disputing that Cassandra has a learning curve but I just disagree that it is any different to every other database available today. They ALL have issues and eventual consistency is a fundamental part of a distributed database so its something you have to learn either way.
  - rescrv 14y ago
    Check out HyperDex, Hbase and BigTable for systems that provide better guarantees than "eventually."
    - tylerhobbs 14y ago
      You would need to define "consistency" in order to have a more reasonable discussion about what each system provides, but Cassandra certainly isn't only eventually consistent. You can choose the number of replicas that must respond in order to consider the read/write operation a success per operation, which allows you to have quorum-based strong consistency guarantees. There are more details on the options here: http://www.datastax.com/docs/1.2/dml/data_consistency http://www.datastax.com/docs/1.2/dml/data_consistency
      - rescrv 14y ago
        Consistency is a safety property. HyperDex, Hbase and BigTable all provide linearizability, which has a well-defined meaning. Cassandra does not, and most of its descriptions of consistency only refer to the behavior of the system, and not the properties you can rely upon. Pointing to the number of replicas read or written only clouds the issue.
        crypto5 14y ago
        I think if you will write to Cassandra with consistency level ALL, you will get strong consistency. Or you can use write consistency = 1 and read = ALL, or write consistency = Quorum and read consistency = Quorum.
    - gummydude 14y ago
      FoundationDB, RethinkDB
encoderer 14y ago
> You don't have to understand ColumnFamilies, consistency or the different topology strategies. The defaults are fine Whaa?? Fine for what? I agree with the OP. I used cassandra at a startup for a year, about a year ago, and haven't used it since last April. I'm sure things have progressed some (and we were using SuperColumns which a new user today might not) but the idea that it's a black box you don't need to understand? Not at the load we were putting it under.
- taligent 14y ago
  Cassandra by itself is definitely complex. But if you're a Java developer then PlayORM/Astyanax abstracts away almost all of the complexity and allow you to focus on your data model and not worry about the columns. Likewise for the preferences the defaults make sense and are pretty straightforward to change if you do need.
stiff 14y ago
What is hard about using PostgreSQL?
jmix 14y ago
>You don't have to understand ... consistency This is a recipe for disaster. Cassandra requires careful understanding of its claimed consistency guarantees to be used properly. Proper use of the ConsistencyLevel argument is pretty critical if you want to build a real site that actually works under load.

3amOpsGuy 14y ago

If you don't understand the implications of eventual consistency, you're heading for a fall. It's not a trivial topic and unfortunately "it appears to work as you'd expect" on a small dev cluster which can lead to statements like yours. Your parent's post is actually very very accurate.

taligent 14y ago
I am not disputing that Cassandra has a learning curve but I just disagree that it is any different to every other database available today. They ALL have issues and eventual consistency is a fundamental part of a distributed database so its something you have to learn either way.
- rescrv 14y ago
  Check out HyperDex, Hbase and BigTable for systems that provide better guarantees than "eventually."
  - tylerhobbs 14y ago
    You would need to define "consistency" in order to have a more reasonable discussion about what each system provides, but Cassandra certainly isn't only eventually consistent. You can choose the number of replicas that must respond in order to consider the read/write operation a success per operation, which allows you to have quorum-based strong consistency guarantees. There are more details on the options here: http://www.datastax.com/docs/1.2/dml/data_consistency http://www.datastax.com/docs/1.2/dml/data_consistency
    - rescrv 14y ago
      Consistency is a safety property. HyperDex, Hbase and BigTable all provide linearizability, which has a well-defined meaning. Cassandra does not, and most of its descriptions of consistency only refer to the behavior of the system, and not the properties you can rely upon. Pointing to the number of replicas read or written only clouds the issue.
      - crypto5 14y ago
        I think if you will write to Cassandra with consistency level ALL, you will get strong consistency. Or you can use write consistency = 1 and read = ALL, or write consistency = Quorum and read consistency = Quorum.
  - gummydude 14y ago
    FoundationDB, RethinkDB

encoderer 14y ago

> You don't have to understand ColumnFamilies, consistency or the different topology strategies. The defaults are fine Whaa?? Fine for what? I agree with the OP. I used cassandra at a startup for a year, about a year ago, and haven't used it since last April. I'm sure things have progressed some (and we were using SuperColumns which a new user today might not) but the idea that it's a black box you don't need to understand? Not at the load we were putting it under.

taligent 14y ago
Cassandra by itself is definitely complex. But if you're a Java developer then PlayORM/Astyanax abstracts away almost all of the complexity and allow you to focus on your data model and not worry about the columns. Likewise for the preferences the defaults make sense and are pretty straightforward to change if you do need.

stiff 14y ago

What is hard about using PostgreSQL?

jmix 14y ago

>You don't have to understand ... consistency This is a recipe for disaster. Cassandra requires careful understanding of its claimed consistency guarantees to be used properly. Proper use of the ConsistencyLevel argument is pretty critical if you want to build a real site that actually works under load.