Apache HBase vs. Scylla

HBase is well suited for streaming ingest, fast lookups, massive datasets, data warehouse lookup tables, RDBMS replacement, MongoDB replacement, key-value store, data scans, logs, JSON storage and some binary storage. My preferred use case is for storing data points like time series or data produced by sensors. I often use HBase when I need data available immediately and I am not looking for transactions. This is a great store for really wide tables with tons of columns. It is also great if you are not sure what type of data you are going to have. It really excels at sparse data.

Incentivized

Scylla is well suited for high-throughput scenarios where keyed data must be read or written with consistently low latency. It's less appropriate for use cases requiring relational queries, secondary indexes, or more structured data sets.

• Scalable and truly non-relational data
• HBase operations run in real-time on its database rather than MapReduce jobs
• Scales linearly to support billions of rows with millions of columns

Incentivized

• Low-latency reads
• CQL has a familiar syntax
• Parity with Cassandra
• Practical features

• Write performance
• Performance support for parquet file format. supports, but performance wise still not there
• API / library availability for spark, rather than creating a new library for it

Incentivized

• Better documentation for best practices (e.g., how to effectively use connection pooling)

There's really not anything else out there that I've seen comparable for my use cases. HBase has never proven me wrong. Some companies align their whole business on HBase and are moving all of their infrastructure from other database engines to HBase. It's also open source and has a very collaborative community.

Incentivized

Very easy-to-understand syntax--uses CQL (same as Cassandra), which has many similarities to standard SQL. There are some gotchas, however, that must be known during schema development.

The Scylla cloud support team is incredibly responsive and proactive.

Compared NoSQL databases with traditional databases for faster retrieval and consistency. As MongoDB is a NoSQL supports dynamic fields, however, query performance is bad for aggregations and added maintenance. When compared with MySQL and Teradata, it could not scale up as fast as Hbase and added cost involved to it. HBase can be easily scalable to a huge volume of records, have a faster lookup and provides consistency

Incentivized

Scylla has a quick learning curve (same as Cassandra) compared to other proprietary solutions like BigTable. It supports higher throughput and lower latency that other NoSQL databases like MongoDB, which sacrifice those features for more flexibility and unique features.

• Positive: Open source, easy to use, good to store big data.
• Negative: SQL functionalities are not available.
• More memory utilization
• More troubleshooting

Incentivized

• Addresses latency requirements of our platform