Totally agree that Cassandra and voltdb fulfill different needs. I
would say mysql cluster (ndbd) would be a more appropriate
competitor. 50tb? Yes and no - it's designed to integrate with a
system called vertica which does scale to that size, but as a stand
alone system I don't believe so.
--
Thanks,
Charles Woerner
On Jun 9, 2010, at 2:35 PM, Ned Wolpert <ned.wolp...@imemories.com>
wrote:
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>
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]
Sent: Friday, June 04, 2010 10:17 AM
To: user
Subject: 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
