As far as finding its competitors go; If you need acid compliance, Cassandra isn't in the list. If you need 50TB of data, is VoltDB in the list?
On Wed, Jun 9, 2010 at 2:30 PM, Charles Woerner / IMAP < charleswoer...@gmail.com> wrote: > I would disagree with that assessment. My take is that Voltdb is a high > throughput, fault tolerant transaction processing db as opposed to a caching > system or key value store. It's easy to get hung up on the in-memory nature > of it but I believe that it is both fault tolerant through redundant copies > of the data and fully acid compliant. > > -- > Thanks, > > Charles Woerner > > On Jun 9, 2010, at 12:09 PM, AJ Slater <a...@zuno.com> wrote: > > Its proper competitors are stuff like redis and memcached. > > On Fri, Jun 4, 2010 at 8:19 AM, Jones, Nick < <nick.jo...@amd.com> > nick.jo...@amd.com> wrote: > >> I saw a tweet about claiming far better performance to Cassandra. After >> following up, I found out it requires the entire DB to reside in memory >> across the nodes. >> >> >> >> *Nick Jones* >> >> >> >> *From:* Denis Haskin [mailto: <de...@haskinferguson.net> >> de...@haskinferguson.net] >> *Sent:* Friday, June 04, 2010 10:17 AM >> *To:* user >> *Subject:* <http://voltdb.com/>http://voltdb.com/ ? >> >> >> >> Anybody looked at VoltDB? I haven't dug into it, but curious about it. >> >> >> dwh >> > > -- Virtually, Ned Wolpert "Settle thy studies, Faustus, and begin..." --Marlowe
