Need advice about which tool to choose?Ask the StackShare community!

Cassandra

3.6K
3.5K
+ 1
507
FoundationDB

33
79
+ 1
21
Add tool

Cassandra vs FoundationDB: What are the differences?

Key Differences between Cassandra and FoundationDB

Cassandra and FoundationDB are both highly scalable distributed databases that offer different features and functionalities. Here are the key differences between them:

  1. Data Model: Cassandra is a wide-column store database that follows a key-value data model. It is based on the key-value store concept, where each row has a primary key and multiple columns with values. On the other hand, FoundationDB is a key-value store database that follows a document data model. It supports advanced data structures like JSON or nested documents, allowing for more complex data representation and querying.

  2. Consistency Model: Cassandra follows a tunable consistency model known as eventual consistency. It prioritizes high availability and partition tolerance over strong consistency, allowing for fast and scalable operations. FoundationDB, on the other hand, follows a strongly consistent model by default. It ensures that all clients see the same data at the same time, providing strong guarantees for correctness and integrity.

  3. Scalability: Both Cassandra and FoundationDB are designed to scale horizontally. However, Cassandra provides a more seamless and auto-sharding approach to handle large datasets and high traffic loads. It employs a shared-nothing architecture with peer-to-peer replication, allowing for easy addition and removal of nodes. FoundationDB also supports horizontal scalability, but it requires explicit partitioning of data to distribute it across multiple nodes.

  4. Conflict Resolution: In the case of concurrent updates or conflicts, Cassandra uses a last-write-wins conflict resolution strategy. The most recent write will overwrite the previous values. On the other hand, FoundationDB uses multi-version concurrency control (MVCC) to handle conflicts. It keeps track of different versions of a value and enables clients to resolve conflicts based on their specific requirements.

  5. Transactions: Cassandra has limited support for transactions that only span a single partition. It does not provide support for distributed ACID transactions. In contrast, FoundationDB provides full support for distributed ACID transactions, allowing multiple operations across different keys or key ranges to be executed atomically.

  6. Query Language: Cassandra uses Cassandra Query Language (CQL), which is a SQL-like language with some extensions specific to Cassandra's data model. It allows for basic CRUD operations, as well as filtering and aggregation. FoundationDB does not have a specific query language but provides client libraries and APIs that allow developers to build their own query interface using their preferred programming language.

In summary, Cassandra is a wide-column store with eventual consistency, while FoundationDB is a key-value store with strong consistency. Cassandra prioritizes scalability and high availability, while FoundationDB focuses on strong consistency and ACID transactions. The choice between the two depends on the specific requirements of the application, data model complexity, and the need for transactional guarantees.

Advice on Cassandra and FoundationDB
Umair Iftikhar
Technical Architect at ERP Studio · | 3 upvotes · 449.9K views
Needs advice
on
CassandraCassandraDruidDruid
and
TimescaleDBTimescaleDB

Developing a solution that collects Telemetry Data from different devices, nearly 1000 devices minimum and maximum 12000. Each device is sending 2 packets in 1 second. This is time-series data, and this data definition and different reports are saved on PostgreSQL. Like Building information, maintenance records, etc. I want to know about the best solution. This data is required for Math and ML to run different algorithms. Also, data is raw without definitions and information stored in PostgreSQL. Initially, I went with TimescaleDB due to PostgreSQL support, but to increase in sites, I started facing many issues with timescale DB in terms of flexibility of storing data.

My major requirement is also the replication of the database for reporting and different purposes. You may also suggest other options other than Druid and Cassandra. But an open source solution is appreciated.

See more
Replies (1)
Recommends
on
MongoDBMongoDB

Hi Umair, Did you try MongoDB. We are using MongoDB on a production environment and collecting data from devices like your scenario. We have a MongoDB cluster with three replicas. Data from devices are being written to the master node and real-time dashboard UI is using the secondary nodes for read operations. With this setup write operations are not affected by read operations too.

See more
Vinay Mehta
Needs advice
on
CassandraCassandra
and
ScyllaDBScyllaDB

The problem I have is - we need to process & change(update/insert) 55M Data every 2 min and this updated data to be available for Rest API for Filtering / Selection. Response time for Rest API should be less than 1 sec.

The most important factors for me are processing and storing time of 2 min. There need to be 2 views of Data One is for Selection & 2. Changed data.

See more
Replies (4)
Recommends
on
ScyllaDBScyllaDB

Scylla can handle 1M/s events with a simple data model quite easily. The api to query is CQL, we have REST api but that's for control/monitoring

See more
Alex Peake
Recommends
on
CassandraCassandra

Cassandra is quite capable of the task, in a highly available way, given appropriate scaling of the system. Remember that updates are only inserts, and that efficient retrieval is only by key (which can be a complex key). Talking of keys, make sure that the keys are well distributed.

See more
Pankaj Soni
Chief Technical Officer at Software Joint · | 2 upvotes · 161.9K views
Recommends
on
CassandraCassandra

i love syclla for pet projects however it's license which is based on server model is an issue. thus i recommend cassandra

See more
Recommends
on
ScyllaDBScyllaDB

By 55M do you mean 55 million entity changes per 2 minutes? It is relatively high, means almost 460k per second. If I had to choose between Scylla or Cassandra, I would opt for Scylla as it is promising better performance for simple operations. However, maybe it would be worth to consider yet another alternative technology. Take into consideration required consistency, reliability and high availability and you may realize that there are more suitable once. Rest API should not be the main driver, because you can always develop the API yourself, if not supported by given technology.

See more
Decisions about Cassandra and FoundationDB
Micha Mailänder
CEO & Co-Founder at Dechea · | 14 upvotes · 86.1K views

Fauna is a serverless database where you store data as JSON. Also, you have build in a HTTP GraphQL interface with a full authentication & authorization layer. That means you can skip your Backend and call it directly from the Frontend. With the power, that you can write data transformation function within Fauna with her own language called FQL, we're getting a blazing fast application.

Also, Fauna takes care about scaling and backups (All data are sharded on three different locations on the globe). That means we can fully focus on writing business logic and don't have to worry anymore about infrastructure.

See more
Karan Kaushik
Senior Software Developer at Shyplite · | 5 upvotes · 38.9K views

So, we started using foundationDB for an OLAP system although the inbuilt tools for some core things like aggregation and filtering were negligible, with the high through put of the DB, we were able to handle it on the application. The system has been running pretty well for the past 6 months, although the data load isn’t very high yet, the performance is fairly promising

See more
Manage your open source components, licenses, and vulnerabilities
Learn More
Pros of Cassandra
Pros of FoundationDB
  • 119
    Distributed
  • 98
    High performance
  • 81
    High availability
  • 74
    Easy scalability
  • 53
    Replication
  • 26
    Reliable
  • 26
    Multi datacenter deployments
  • 10
    Schema optional
  • 9
    OLTP
  • 8
    Open source
  • 2
    Workload separation (via MDC)
  • 1
    Fast
  • 6
    ACID transactions
  • 5
    Linear scalability
  • 3
    Multi-model database
  • 3
    Key-Value Store
  • 3
    Great Foundation
  • 1
    SQL Layer

Sign up to add or upvote prosMake informed product decisions

Cons of Cassandra
Cons of FoundationDB
  • 3
    Reliability of replication
  • 1
    Size
  • 1
    Updates
    Be the first to leave a con

    Sign up to add or upvote consMake informed product decisions

    - No public GitHub repository available -

    What is Cassandra?

    Partitioning means that Cassandra can distribute your data across multiple machines in an application-transparent matter. Cassandra will automatically repartition as machines are added and removed from the cluster. Row store means that like relational databases, Cassandra organizes data by rows and columns. The Cassandra Query Language (CQL) is a close relative of SQL.

    What is FoundationDB?

    FoundationDB is a NoSQL database with a shared nothing architecture. Designed around a "core" ordered key-value database, additional features and data models are supplied in layers. The key-value database, as well as all layers, supports full, cross-key and cross-server ACID transactions.

    Need advice about which tool to choose?Ask the StackShare community!

    What companies use Cassandra?
    What companies use FoundationDB?
    Manage your open source components, licenses, and vulnerabilities
    Learn More

    Sign up to get full access to all the companiesMake informed product decisions

    What tools integrate with Cassandra?
    What tools integrate with FoundationDB?
      No integrations found

      Sign up to get full access to all the tool integrationsMake informed product decisions

      Blog Posts

      What are some alternatives to Cassandra and FoundationDB?
      HBase
      Apache HBase is an open-source, distributed, versioned, column-oriented store modeled after Google' Bigtable: A Distributed Storage System for Structured Data by Chang et al. Just as Bigtable leverages the distributed data storage provided by the Google File System, HBase provides Bigtable-like capabilities on top of Apache Hadoop.
      Google Cloud Bigtable
      Google Cloud Bigtable offers you a fast, fully managed, massively scalable NoSQL database service that's ideal for web, mobile, and Internet of Things applications requiring terabytes to petabytes of data. Unlike comparable market offerings, Cloud Bigtable doesn't require you to sacrifice speed, scale, or cost efficiency when your applications grow. Cloud Bigtable has been battle-tested at Google for more than 10 years—it's the database driving major applications such as Google Analytics and Gmail.
      Hadoop
      The Apache Hadoop software library is a framework that allows for the distributed processing of large data sets across clusters of computers using simple programming models. It is designed to scale up from single servers to thousands of machines, each offering local computation and storage.
      Redis
      Redis is an open source (BSD licensed), in-memory data structure store, used as a database, cache, and message broker. Redis provides data structures such as strings, hashes, lists, sets, sorted sets with range queries, bitmaps, hyperloglogs, geospatial indexes, and streams.
      Couchbase
      Developed as an alternative to traditionally inflexible SQL databases, the Couchbase NoSQL database is built on an open source foundation and architected to help developers solve real-world problems and meet high scalability demands.
      See all alternatives