Thanks for posting your results; it is an interesting read and we are pleased to beat HBase in most workloads. :)
Since you originally benchmarked 0.4.2, you might be interested in the speed gains in 0.5. A couple graphs here: http://spyced.blogspot.com/2010/01/cassandra-05.html 0.6 (beta in a few weeks?) is looking even better. :) -Jonathan On Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 2:35 PM, Brian Frank Cooper <coop...@yahoo-inc.com> wrote: > Hi folks, > > > > We have been conducting a performance study comparing Cassandra and HBase > (and Yahoo! PNUTS and MySQL) on identical hardware under identical > workloads. Our focus has been on serving workloads (e.g. read and write > individual records, rather than scan a whole table for MapReduce.) This is > part of a larger effort to develop a benchmark for these kinds of systems > (which we are calling YCSB, or the Yahoo Cloud Serving Benchmark.) > > > > I thought this list might be interested in the first set of results we have. > We submitted a paper on these results, and the benchmark as a whole, and we > are continuing to benchmark other scenarios and systems. But we have > produced a snapshot of the results if you are interested: > > > > High level summary: http://www.brianfrankcooper.net/pubs/ycsb-v4.pdf > > Detailed paper: http://www.brianfrankcooper.net/pubs/ycsb.pdf > > > > In general, Cassandra performs quite well, with good throughput and latency > compared to PNUTS (which we call Sherpa internally) and better throughput > than HBase. > > > > I’d be happy to answer any questions about the results or discuss possible > ways to tune Cassandra. We had already received extensive tuning help from > this list last year (thanks!) but more suggestions are always helpful. > > > > The benchmark tool will be open sourced real soon now (we are just waiting > for final approval from Yahoo legal) and our hope is that it is a useful > tool for apples-to-apples comparison of different systems. > > > > Brian > > > > -- > > Brian Cooper > > Principal Research Scientist > > Yahoo! Research > >
