Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-cassandra-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 16703 invoked from network); 21 Nov 2010 16:32:50 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.3) by 140.211.11.9 with SMTP; 21 Nov 2010 16:32:50 -0000 Received: (qmail 2567 invoked by uid 500); 21 Nov 2010 16:33:21 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-cassandra-dev-archive@cassandra.apache.org Received: (qmail 2430 invoked by uid 500); 21 Nov 2010 16:33:19 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@cassandra.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: dev@cassandra.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@cassandra.apache.org Received: (qmail 2415 invoked by uid 99); 21 Nov 2010 16:33:19 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sun, 21 Nov 2010 16:33:19 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=2.5 required=10.0 tests=FREEMAIL_FROM,HTML_FONT_FACE_BAD,HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_PASS,T_TO_NO_BRKTS_FREEMAIL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of simon.reavely@gmail.com designates 209.85.216.44 as permitted sender) Received: from [209.85.216.44] (HELO mail-qw0-f44.google.com) (209.85.216.44) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sun, 21 Nov 2010 16:33:14 +0000 Received: by qwb7 with SMTP id 7so1423390qwb.31 for ; Sun, 21 Nov 2010 08:32:53 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:received:date:message-id :subject:from:to:content-type; bh=eZV3uVc0vcv8yWK676KNS8GQS1xhkHhaVqlskctMWxg=; b=qPIAj98PK4aTpfWwUUB59/Du1tKTwhEC6jafKn+G/UbDvv50wpq2onVVRwFwGRI2od iGPJGC4deQ17iK9o8bIynPjxcubMZtIBrCUEyM347v2NQs4EUtXx9FtMVHMtC4ydIAd7 AWYFjeg26rTh0Iumi2a1KcaYdd4FJxpKegqnY= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; b=ZMk1xvu+nY4mmrSO+AIMfdZmwCbQj+Lfo0Ul6F5XbczWovBRixJXc/qbq+HWjkdJj8 GTHBBkJ4bHgX1WjRKDb8E3rbFaFohJYd7q8KJUPDyQm3MsrIGeR1NwDPFm7DpO10brQt 0Iu03HDJE5iAqACktkmVDBLr4kO/dc8amL/b8= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.229.228.146 with SMTP id je18mr4182536qcb.13.1290357173448; Sun, 21 Nov 2010 08:32:53 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.220.128.8 with HTTP; Sun, 21 Nov 2010 08:32:53 -0800 (PST) Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2010 11:32:53 -0500 Message-ID: Subject: Facebook messaging and choice of HBase over Cassandra - what can we learn? From: Simon Reavely To: user@cassandra.apache.org, dev@cassandra.apache.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=0016363b84acf4f022049592b03e --0016363b84acf4f022049592b03e Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 (Posting this to both user + dev lists) I was reviewing the blog post on the facebook engineering blog from nov 15th http://www.facebook.com/note.php?note_id=454991608919# The Underlying Technology of Messages by Kannan Muthukkaruppan As a cassandra user I think the key sentence for this community is: "We found Cassandra's eventual consistency model to be a difficult pattern to reconcile for our new Messages infrastructure." I think it would be useful to find out more about this statement from Kannan and the facebook team. Does anyone have any contacts in the Facebook team? My goal here is to understand usage patterns and whether or not the Cassandra community can learn from this decision; maybe even understand whether the Cassandra roadmap should be influenced by this decision to address a target user base. Of course we might also conclude that its just "not a Cassandra use-case"! Cheers, Simon -- Simon Reavely simon.reavely@gmail.com --0016363b84acf4f022049592b03e--