Messenger can allow for some losses in degenerate infra cases, given a
given infra footprint. Also some ability to handle scale up faster as
demand increases, peak loads, etc. It therefore becomes a use case specific
optimization. Also hBase can run in Hadoop more easily, leveraging blobs
(HDFS),
Thank you very much for fast reply, Dinesh!
I was under impression that with tunable consistency Cassandra can
act as CP (in case it is needed), e.g by setting ALL on both reads
and writes.
Do you agree with this statement?
PS Are there any other benefits of HBase you have found? I'd be glad
At the time that Facebook chose HBase, Cassandra was drastically less
mature than it is now and I think the original creators had already left.
There were already various Hadoop variants running for data analytics etc,
so lots of operational and engineering experience around it available. So,
I've worked with both databases. They're suitable for different use-cases. If
you look at the CAP theorem; HBase is CP while Cassandra is a AP. If we talk
about a specific use-case, it'll be easier to discuss.
Dinesh
On Friday, August 24, 2018, 1:56:31 PM PDT, Vitaliy Semochkin
wrote:
Hi,
I read that once Facebook chose HBase over Cassandra for it's messenger,
but I never found what are the benefits for HBase over Cassandra,
can someone list, if there are any?
Regards,
Vitaliy
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail:
