cassandra-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Johan Stuyts" <>
Subject Re: Scaling from 1 to x (was: one server or more servers?)
Date Tue, 14 Jul 2009 13:24:52 GMT
> If you are not sure whether N will ever be reached, then you don't need  
> to deploy Cassandra until you reach a point where you're sure it will be  
> reached.

No, I am not sure I will even get past one, just hopeful.

> If your application's scale is planned (i.e. by management who do  
> planning-type things) to exceed what you can reasonably get out of a  
> conventional database (with or without various types of scale-out  
> solution), then Cassandra might be the right solution for you.

I am not only interested in Cassandra because of its load balancing,  
scaling and failover properties. If I understand correctly it is also an  
extremely fast datastore. Wouldn't I save a lot of effort to design and  
build a data access layer (sharding, replication and caching) by using  

One of the purposes I want to use Cassandra for is custom HTTP session  
replication. Instead of storing the values in the session of the servlet  
container I want to store them individually using unique keys in  
Cassandra. I was hoping Cassandra would be fast enough for this.

> I feel that developing an application for Cassandra is a lot more  
> difficult than a "traditional" database, ...

What is a lot more difficult to do using Cassandra? I intend to use a SQL  
database for all the really important stuff (credentials and stuff  
involving money), and use Cassandra for less important information. I  
understand I have to think about doing things without transactions and  
designing things to be idempotent.



View raw message