Microsoft SQL Server vs ScyllaDB

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

Microsoft SQL Server

19.4K
15K
+ 1
540
ScyllaDB

131
182
+ 1
8
Add tool

Microsoft SQL Server vs Scylla: What are the differences?

Introduction

Microsoft SQL Server and Scylla are both popular database management systems used in various applications. However, there are key differences between the two that make them suitable for different use cases. In this article, we will explore and compare these differences.

  1. Data Model: Microsoft SQL Server is a relational database management system (RDBMS) that organizes data into tables with predefined schemas, where relationships between tables are defined by foreign keys. On the other hand, Scylla is a NoSQL database that uses a wide column data model, where data is organized into tables, but with a flexible schema that allows for dynamic column addition.

  2. Scalability: Scylla is designed for high scalability with a distributed architecture that allows it to easily scale horizontally by adding more nodes to the cluster. In contrast, while Microsoft SQL Server does support some forms of scaling, its scaling capabilities are more limited compared to Scylla.

  3. Performance: Scylla is known for its exceptional performance, especially when it comes to write-intensive workloads. It achieves this by employing a log-structured merge (LSM) strategy, which optimizes write operations. On the other hand, while Microsoft SQL Server is also performant, it may not be as optimized for write-intensive workloads as Scylla.

  4. Consistency vs Availability: In terms of the CAP theorem (Consistency, Availability, Partition Tolerance), Microsoft SQL Server prioritizes consistency and availability. It ensures that data remains consistent even during network partitions, but at the cost of potential performance impact. Scylla, being a NoSQL database, focuses more on availability and partition tolerance, which means it may sacrifice some consistency guarantees in favor of high availability and fault tolerance.

  5. Data Distribution: Microsoft SQL Server uses a master-slave replication model for data distribution. It relies on a central master server to handle write operations and replicates data to one or more slave servers for read operations. In contrast, Scylla utilizes a peer-to-peer gossip-based protocol to distribute data evenly across all nodes in the cluster, allowing for better data replication and fault tolerance.

  6. Cost: Microsoft SQL Server is available as a commercial product, which means it comes with licensing fees that can be quite significant, especially for larger deployments. On the other hand, Scylla is an open-source database, providing a more cost-effective option without licensing costs. However, it should be noted that additional hardware and operational costs may still apply.

In summary, Microsoft SQL Server is a relational database management system that prioritizes consistency and availability, while Scylla is a NoSQL database with a focus on scalability, high performance, and availability. Additionally, Microsoft SQL Server comes with licensing costs, whereas Scylla is an open-source option.

Advice on Microsoft SQL Server and ScyllaDB

I am a Microsoft SQL Server programmer who is a bit out of practice. I have been asked to assist on a new project. The overall purpose is to organize a large number of recordings so that they can be searched. I have an enormous music library but my songs are several hours long. I need to include things like time, date and location of the recording. I don't have a problem with the general database design. I have two primary questions:

  1. I need to use either MySQL or PostgreSQL on a Linux based OS. Which would be better for this application?
  2. I have not dealt with a sound based data type before. How do I store that and put it in a table? Thank you.
See more
Replies (6)

Hi Erin,

Honestly both databases will do the job just fine. I personally prefer Postgres.

Much more important is how you store the audio. While you could technically use a blob type column, it's really not ideal to be storing audio files which are "several hours long" in a database row. Instead consider storing the audio files in an object store (hosted options include backblaze b2 or aws s3) and persisting the key (which references that object) in your database column.

See more
Aaron Westley
Recommends
on
PostgreSQLPostgreSQL

Hi Erin, Chances are you would want to store the files in a blob type. Both MySQL and Postgres support this. Can you explain a little more about your need to store the files in the database? I may be more effective to store the files on a file system or something like S3. To answer your qustion based on what you are descibing I would slighly lean towards PostgreSQL since it tends to be a little better on the data warehousing side.

See more
Christopher Wray
Web Developer at Soltech LLC · | 3 upvotes · 431.5K views
Recommends
on
DirectusDirectus
at

Hey Erin! I would recommend checking out Directus before you start work on building your own app for them. I just stumbled upon it, and so far extremely happy with the functionalities. If your client is just looking for a simple web app for their own data, then Directus may be a great option. It offers "database mirroring", so that you can connect it to any database and set up functionality around it!

See more
Julien DeFrance
Principal Software Engineer at Tophatter · | 3 upvotes · 431.1K views
Recommends
on
Amazon AuroraAmazon Aurora

Hi Erin! First of all, you'd probably want to go with a managed service. Don't spin up your own MySQL installation on your own Linux box. If you are on AWS, thet have different offerings for database services. Standard RDS vs. Aurora. Aurora would be my preferred choice given the benefits it offers, storage optimizations it comes with... etc. Such managed services easily allow you to apply new security patches and upgrades, set up backups, replication... etc. Doing this on your own would either be risky, inefficient, or you might just give up. As far as which database to chose, you'll have the choice between Postgresql, MySQL, Maria DB, SQL Server... etc. I personally would recommend MySQL (latest version available), as the official tooling for it (MySQL Workbench) is great, stable, and moreover free. Other database services exist, I'd recommend you also explore Dynamo DB.

Regardless, you'd certainly only keep high-level records, meta data in Database, and the actual files, most-likely in S3, so that you can keep all options open in terms of what you'll do with them.

See more
Recommends
on
PostgreSQLPostgreSQL

Hi Erin,

  • Coming from "Big" DB engines, such as Oracle or MSSQL, go for PostgreSQL. You'll get all the features you need with PostgreSQL.
  • Your case seems to point to a "NoSQL" or Document Database use case. Since you get covered on this with PostgreSQL which achieves excellent performances on JSON based objects, this is a second reason to choose PostgreSQL. MongoDB might be an excellent option as well if you need "sharding" and excellent map-reduce mechanisms for very massive data sets. You really should investigate the NoSQL option for your use case.
  • Starting with AWS Aurora is an excellent advise. since "vendor lock-in" is limited, but I did not check for JSON based object / NoSQL features.
  • If you stick to Linux server, the PostgreSQL or MySQL provided with your distribution are straightforward to install (i.e. apt install postgresql). For PostgreSQL, make sure you're comfortable with the pg_hba.conf, especially for IP restrictions & accesses.

Regards,

See more
Klaus Nji
Staff Software Engineer at SailPoint Technologies · | 1 upvotes · 431.2K views
Recommends
on
PostgreSQLPostgreSQL

I recommend Postgres as well. Superior performance overall and a more robust architecture.

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
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
Pankaj Soni
Chief Technical Officer at Software Joint · | 2 upvotes · 148.4K 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
Decisions about Microsoft SQL Server and ScyllaDB
Tom Klein

The Gentlent Tech Team made lots of updates within the past year. The biggest one being our database:

We decided to migrate our #PostgreSQL -based database systems to a custom implementation of #Cassandra . This allows us to integrate our product data perfectly in a system that just makes sense. High availability and scalability are supported out of the box.

See more
Get Advice from developers at your company using StackShare Enterprise. Sign up for StackShare Enterprise.
Learn More
Pros of Microsoft SQL Server
Pros of ScyllaDB
  • 139
    Reliable and easy to use
  • 102
    High performance
  • 95
    Great with .net
  • 65
    Works well with .net
  • 56
    Easy to maintain
  • 21
    Azure support
  • 17
    Full Index Support
  • 17
    Always on
  • 10
    Enterprise manager is fantastic
  • 9
    In-Memory OLTP Engine
  • 2
    Easy to setup and configure
  • 2
    Security is forefront
  • 1
    Faster Than Oracle
  • 1
    Decent management tools
  • 1
    Great documentation
  • 1
    Docker Delivery
  • 1
    Columnstore indexes
  • 2
    Replication
  • 1
    Fewer nodes
  • 1
    Distributed
  • 1
    Scale up
  • 1
    High availability
  • 1
    Written in C++
  • 1
    High performance

Sign up to add or upvote prosMake informed product decisions

Cons of Microsoft SQL Server
Cons of ScyllaDB
  • 4
    Expensive Licensing
  • 2
    Microsoft
    Be the first to leave a con

    Sign up to add or upvote consMake informed product decisions

    What is Microsoft SQL Server?

    Microsoft® SQL Server is a database management and analysis system for e-commerce, line-of-business, and data warehousing solutions.

    What is ScyllaDB?

    ScyllaDB is the database for data-intensive apps that require high performance and low latency. It enables teams to harness the ever-increasing computing power of modern infrastructures – eliminating barriers to scale as data grows.

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

    What companies use Microsoft SQL Server?
    What companies use ScyllaDB?
    See which teams inside your own company are using Microsoft SQL Server or ScyllaDB.
    Sign up for StackShare EnterpriseLearn More

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

    What tools integrate with Microsoft SQL Server?
    What tools integrate with ScyllaDB?

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

    What are some alternatives to Microsoft SQL Server and ScyllaDB?
    Oracle
    Oracle Database is an RDBMS. An RDBMS that implements object-oriented features such as user-defined types, inheritance, and polymorphism is called an object-relational database management system (ORDBMS). Oracle Database has extended the relational model to an object-relational model, making it possible to store complex business models in a relational database.
    PostgreSQL
    PostgreSQL is an advanced object-relational database management system that supports an extended subset of the SQL standard, including transactions, foreign keys, subqueries, triggers, user-defined types and functions.
    Apache Aurora
    Apache Aurora is a service scheduler that runs on top of Mesos, enabling you to run long-running services that take advantage of Mesos' scalability, fault-tolerance, and resource isolation.
    Microsoft Access
    It is an easy-to-use tool for creating business applications, from templates or from scratch. With its rich and intuitive design tools, it can help you create appealing and highly functional applications in a minimal amount of time.
    MariaDB
    Started by core members of the original MySQL team, MariaDB actively works with outside developers to deliver the most featureful, stable, and sanely licensed open SQL server in the industry. MariaDB is designed as a drop-in replacement of MySQL(R) with more features, new storage engines, fewer bugs, and better performance.
    See all alternatives