Apache Cassandra vs. FirebirdSQL

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
Cassandra
Score 9.0 out of 10
N/A
Cassandra is a no-SQL database from Apache.N/A
Firebird
Score 9.8 out of 10
N/A
FirebirdSQL is an open-source database which can be embedded.N/A
Pricing
Apache CassandraFirebirdSQL
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
CassandraFirebird
Free Trial
NoNo
Free/Freemium Version
NoNo
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup fee
Additional Details
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Apache CassandraFirebirdSQL
Features
Apache CassandraFirebirdSQL
NoSQL Databases
Comparison of NoSQL Databases features of Product A and Product B
Apache Cassandra
8.0
Ratings
10% below category average
FirebirdSQL
-
Ratings
Performance8.50 Ratings00 Ratings
Availability8.80 Ratings00 Ratings
Concurrency7.60 Ratings00 Ratings
Security8.00 Ratings00 Ratings
Scalability9.50 Ratings00 Ratings
Data model flexibility6.70 Ratings00 Ratings
Deployment model flexibility7.00 Ratings00 Ratings
Best Alternatives
Apache CassandraFirebirdSQL
Small Businesses
IBM Cloudant
IBM Cloudant
Score 7.4 out of 10
InfluxDB
InfluxDB
Score 8.8 out of 10
Medium-sized Companies
IBM Cloudant
IBM Cloudant
Score 7.4 out of 10
SQLite
SQLite
Score 9.6 out of 10
Enterprises
IBM Cloudant
IBM Cloudant
Score 7.4 out of 10
SQLite
SQLite
Score 9.6 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
Apache CassandraFirebirdSQL
Likelihood to Recommend
6.0
(0 ratings)
8.2
(0 ratings)
Likelihood to Renew
8.6
(0 ratings)
9.0
(0 ratings)
Usability
7.0
(0 ratings)
8.0
(0 ratings)
Support Rating
7.0
(0 ratings)
5.0
(0 ratings)
Implementation Rating
7.0
(0 ratings)
9.0
(0 ratings)
User Testimonials
Apache CassandraFirebirdSQL
Likelihood to Recommend
Cassandra excels in a broad range of applications -- especially if you understand its data model and write your applications accordingly. It's an excellent choice for time-series data, and a poor choice for application queues. It performs the best if you can simply record history and compute from it, rather than going back and editing or deleting things a lot.
Read full review
When looking for low maintenance and a solution suited for all kinds of pc applications. It is great when you are looking to store physical files in folder locations and you can then reference the document in the database. It has an open-source community around it along with documentation for third-party drivers of the development environment.
Read full review
Pros
  • High Availability - we utilize the data replication features of Cassandra. This enables us to access our data even when several nodes have gone down
  • Data Locality - our architecture combines Cassandra storage nodes and computation nodes in the same machine. This enables us to utilize data locality and limit expensive network IO to read data.
  • Elasticity - Cassandra is a shared nothing architecture. Nodes can be added very easily and they discover the network topology. As soon as a node has joined the Cassandra ring, the data is redistributed among the existing nodes and streamed to it automatically.
Read full review
  • Reliable RDMS for the SMB's and we found its performance is really fast.
  • It allows us to store the physical files into the folder location and reference of the document in the database.
  • Easy to take back-ups, and portable.
Read full review
Cons
  • No Ad-Hoc Queries: Cassandra data storage layer is basically a key-value storage system. This means that you must "model" your data around the queries you want to surface, rather than around the structure of the data itself.
  • There are no aggregations queries available in Cassandra.
  • Not fit for transactional data.
Read full review
  • Clustering features require alot of attention.
  • Remote access can be quite slow.
Read full review
Likelihood to Renew
I would recommend Cassandra DB to those who know their use case very well, as well as know how they are going to store and retrieve data. If you need a guarantee in data storage and retrieval, and a DB that can be linearly grown by adding nodes across availability zones and regions, then this is the database you should choose.
Read full review
Because it is free and usually zero maintenance. Just the issue of more difficult format updates in the future lower the rating a bit.
Read full review
Usability
It’s great tool but it can be complicated when it comes administration and maintenance.
Read full review
Usability has improved by unifying the architecture. The only thing's missing out of the box is a simple GUI DB tool for viewing DB contents and maybe running some SQL queries.
Read full review
Support Rating
Sometimes instead giving straight answer, we ‘re getting transfered to talk professional service.
Read full review
This is an open source project. It provides a fair amount of free documentation and I think forums somewhere...
Read full review
Implementation Rating
No answers on this topic
Even somebody just starting to use RDBMS himself should get it working quickly, at least if he's got a GUI tool and some SQL knowledge.
Read full review
Alternatives Considered
Apache Cassandra has the best of both worlds, it is a Java based NoSQL, linearly scalable, best in class
tunable performance across different workloads, fault tolerant, distributed, masterless, time series database. We have used both Apache HBase and MongoDB for some use cases which were within hadoop setup and JSON (JavaScript Object Notation) document store respectively, but given the overall factors favoring Apache Cassandra, it is a technology choice for multiple platforms!
Read full review
It is cost-effective, maintenance-free, easy to deploy and use on Linux and Windows environments and it works steadily. It has an open-source license. Installing Oracle was quite difficult in comparison to Firebird.
Read full review
Return on Investment
  • The open source version of Cassandra is only suggested for learning the basic concepts and play with its core features. Unless you really want to invest a lot in your developers and architects knowing every detail of Cassandra, I prefer the DataStax enterprise version. Although the license cost is relatively high, I think they it is worth it. I'm thinking about the support, the monitoring tool OpsCenter, and the integration of Solr and Spark (for data analysis).
  • Cassandra didn't fully replace our old and traditional relation database Oracle. In addition, it opens another door for us to deal with some special business use cases that NoSQL database can do better in a more feasible and efficient way.
Read full review
  • The return on investment was of course because it freed us from paid relational databases.
  • We have never experienced a negative situation.
Read full review
ScreenShots