You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to user@cassandra.apache.org by Kevin <kl...@gmail.com> on 2012/01/30 19:56:05 UTC
How much has Cassandra improved from 0.8.6 to 1.0+?
I'm currently using 0.8.6 and want to know how much (performance wise),
Cassandra has improved. Specifically read performance. This benchmark
<http://amesar.wordpress.com/2011/10/19/mongodb-vs-cassandra-benchmarks/>
here illustrates my concerns. I don't know whether it was a fair comparison
(especially since the conductor did not perform any tweaks or optimizations
beforehand), but from all the resources I've read it seems that Cassandra
still has quite a way to go before matching the read performance of MongoDB
and some of the other NoSQL alternatives.
Is this still true, and if so, how far down the line can we expect to see
work on this specific area?
Re: How much has Cassandra improved from 0.8.6 to 1.0+?
Posted by Jake Luciani <ja...@gmail.com>.
Well as they say "Lies, damned lies, and statistics" This is a alternate
comparison you can review:
http://www.cubrid.org/blog/dev-platform/nosql-benchmarking/
YCSB is a known and agreed upon benchmark. The benchmark you link includes
no sourcecode to reproduce with and as the author mentions "For Cassandra
this was single node cluster, for Mongo simply one server with no
replication. Cluster tests were run for functionality."
-Jake
On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 1:56 PM, Kevin <kl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I’m currently using 0.8.6 and want to know how much (performance wise),
> Cassandra has improved. Specifically read performance. This benchmark<http://amesar.wordpress.com/2011/10/19/mongodb-vs-cassandra-benchmarks/>here illustrates my concerns. I don’t know whether it was a fair comparison
> (especially since the conductor did not perform any tweaks or optimizations
> beforehand), but from all the resources I’ve read it seems that Cassandra
> still has quite a way to go before matching the read performance of MongoDB
> and some of the other NoSQL alternatives. ****
>
> ** **
>
> Is this still true, and if so, how far down the line can we expect to see
> work on this specific area?****
>
--
http://twitter.com/tjake