Comments on: HBase vs. Cassandra: NoSQL Battle!

By: NoSQL Is Not SQL And That’s A Problem « rlblogs.com

NoSQL Is Not SQL And That’s A Problem « rlblogs.com — Thu, 15 Jul 2010 21:45:37 +0000

[...] data persistence and access solutions that challenges the long lasting legacy of RDBMS. Competition between HBase and Cassandra is heating up. Amazon now supports a variety of consistency models on [...]

By: Soluzioni NoSQL, Apache Cassandra | Webbare

Soluzioni NoSQL, Apache Cassandra | Webbare — Mon, 05 Apr 2010 17:00:50 +0000

[...] fra Cassandra e HBase: http://www.roadtofailure.com/2009/10/29/hbase-vs-cassandra-nosql-battle/ [...]

By: craig

craig — Thu, 01 Apr 2010 11:50:31 +0000

Very impressive “note” under the blog post title. I’m curious, what sort of numbers do you have on your ingestion rate, volume/size of data, time until it’s searchable, etc?

By: Configuration management and Chef » zulutime

Configuration management and Chef » zulutime — Sun, 21 Mar 2010 20:47:02 +0000

[...] article specifing why you the article is FUD. I have come across this before when reading about cassandra – I later discovered from an expert inside Yahoo! that a lot of the information was [...]

By: NoSQL Is Not SQL And That’s A Problem | CloudAve

NoSQL Is Not SQL And That’s A Problem | CloudAve — Sat, 06 Mar 2010 02:37:36 +0000

By: HBase vs. Cassandra: NoSQL Battle! | Road to Failure « The other side of the firewall

Wed, 24 Feb 2010 23:04:08 +0000

[...] February 24, 2010 at 6:03 pm · Filed under Cloud computing ·Tagged Databases [From HBase vs. Cassandra: NoSQL Battle! | Road to Failure] [...]

By: Bradford

Bradford — Thu, 24 Dec 2009 05:21:32 +0000

Thanks for the feedback. I’m going to do another end-to-end test with the next release of both products~

By: schubert zhang

schubert zhang — Fri, 06 Nov 2009 16:27:50 +0000

To compare two different architectures, I think it should be objectively and theoretically. Some temporal un-ready features should not be the subjects. Such as the “multi-table” feature, it seems not difficult to be implemented.

It is very interesting that many people doubt Dynamo. Even guys from Facebook: http://jsensarma.com/blog/2009/11/dynamo-a-flawed-architecture-part-i/

I think each architecture is designed for its usage.

By: Twitted by abrdev

Twitted by abrdev — Fri, 30 Oct 2009 20:53:25 +0000

[...] This post was Twitted by abrdev [...]

By: Twitted by pogrebnyak

Twitted by pogrebnyak — Fri, 30 Oct 2009 11:09:27 +0000

[...] This post was Twitted by pogrebnyak [...]