Return-Path: 
 <cassandra-user-return-184-apmail-incubator-cassandra-user-archive=incubator.apache.org@incubator.apache.org>
Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-cassandra-user-archive@minotaur.apache.org
Received: (qmail 61101 invoked from network); 14 Jul 2009 12:20:32 -0000
Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.3)
  by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 14 Jul 2009 12:20:32 -0000
Received: (qmail 84206 invoked by uid 500); 14 Jul 2009 12:20:41 -0000
Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-cassandra-user-archive@incubator.apache.org
Received: (qmail 84181 invoked by uid 500); 14 Jul 2009 12:20:41 -0000
Mailing-List: contact cassandra-user-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Help: <mailto:cassandra-user-help@incubator.apache.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:cassandra-user-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org>
List-Post: <mailto:cassandra-user@incubator.apache.org>
List-Id: <cassandra-user.incubator.apache.org>
Reply-To: cassandra-user@incubator.apache.org
Delivered-To: mailing list cassandra-user@incubator.apache.org
Received: (qmail 84172 invoked by uid 99); 14 Jul 2009 12:20:41 -0000
Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136)
    by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 14 Jul 2009 12:20:41 +0000
X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=2.2 required=10.0
	tests=HTML_MESSAGE,SPF_PASS
X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of markxr@gmail.com designates
 209.85.218.224 as permitted sender)
Received: from [209.85.218.224] (HELO mail-bw0-f224.google.com)
 (209.85.218.224)
    by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 14 Jul 2009 12:20:33 +0000
Received: by bwz24 with SMTP id 24so2835835bwz.12
        for <cassandra-user@incubator.apache.org>;
 Tue, 14 Jul 2009 05:20:12 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references
         :date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type;
        bh=Msy8eb5GU0/kqs4moLTFV8IXn9rHzASuoSzRzYyajzc=;
        b=IZF+zZh9mTE/IFunmiih8qnJzMC/xrI6VTLfSqyA7WVWqIJ18RvT9yztZpf9p6EPwF
         A3jbLjVCUbo4nwahF7IGGC+wtpsRYWCDlHGqrJHK2Dt0FqNg8ssToidgILLcB+55eH4S
         BnujMSyPWQDJq/Z+7tfftR1LP35zQoOl7fROg=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to
         :content-type;
        b=mRuc1XOVOknymHj35zwObgxV1ffShvdfn1v3She8Mqc0ZjwULraNyA+8ZvacheyPyi
         6oSXvG+Txbl/hyx+Lj+5QNHjKvxw4XvehJiqLuh5AfQ/v9Kf4Q6G2BdIj7XvGFrMwsXZ
         DApdgZy0R3PPaEo5qHLYgLd1wAAU4Om2AlV0U=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.204.120.19 with SMTP id b19mr6433356bkr.36.1247574012368;
 Tue,
	14 Jul 2009 05:20:12 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <op.uw135astd8okpy@audioslave>
References: <c1870d60907132314j65127b72nfc41c259a4630e37@mail.gmail.com>
	 <ff1a07b80907140300i7ad9197u8a110ec446cc1836@mail.gmail.com>
	 <op.uw135astd8okpy@audioslave>
Date: Tue, 14 Jul 2009 13:20:12 +0100
Message-ID: <ff1a07b80907140520j7d500224p8ddad5963bd15f1f@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Scaling from 1 to x (was: one server or more servers?)
From: Mark Robson <markxr@gmail.com>
To: cassandra-user@incubator.apache.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001636c5a27ed69676046ea9754f
X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org

--001636c5a27ed69676046ea9754f
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

2009/7/14 Johan Stuyts <j.stuyts@zybber.nl>

> Is it unwise to use Cassandra in production if you use less than n servers?
> I.e. is it better to use another solution for <n servers and switch to
> Cassandra once n is reached?


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.

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 feel that developing an application for Cassandra is a lot more difficult
than a "traditional" database, and it's also a fairly immature product.
There are many drawbacks, such as lack of visibility of storage usage.

I think that Cassandra is likely to become a very compelling system for
large scale problems quite soon, but I don't think it's there yet.

Mark

--001636c5a27ed69676046ea9754f
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<br><div class=3D"gmail_quote">2009/7/14 Johan Stuyts <span dir=3D"ltr">&lt=
;<a href=3D"mailto:j.stuyts@zybber.nl">j.stuyts@zybber.nl</a>&gt;</span><br=
><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"border-left: 1px solid rgb(204,=
 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">

Is it unwise to use Cassandra in production if you use less than n servers?=
 I.e. is it better to use another solution for &lt;n servers and switch to =
Cassandra once n is reached?</blockquote><div><br></div></div>If you are no=
t sure whether N will ever be reached, then you don&#39;t need to deploy Ca=
ssandra until you reach a point where you&#39;re sure it will be reached.<b=
r>
<br>If your application&#39;s scale is planned (i.e. by management who do p=
lanning-type things) to exceed what you can reasonably get out of a convent=
ional database (with or without various types of scale-out solution), then =
Cassandra might be the right solution for you.<br>
<br>I feel that developing an application for Cassandra is a lot more diffi=
cult than a &quot;traditional&quot; database, and it&#39;s also a fairly im=
mature product. There are many drawbacks, such as lack of visibility of sto=
rage usage.<br>
<br>I think that Cassandra is likely to become a very compelling system for=
 large scale problems quite soon, but I don&#39;t think it&#39;s there yet.=
<br><br>Mark<br>

--001636c5a27ed69676046ea9754f--