When I wrote my Why Cassandra article, I didn't get into the why I didn't choose x platform because I didn't want to start a flame war by doing comparisons. For HBase, the primary reason I didn't choose it is that while there were benchmarks of what it could theoretically do, there wasn't any real real world deployments proving it. My experience as a systems administrator is that it's best to go with a product that's been proven over time in real world scenarios.
I'll add to this though, that nothing nosql, even Cassandra, has reached the point where I feel it's no-brainer to choose it over anything, including sql based solutions like mysql and oracle. It really comes down to your requirements.
While Hadoop MapReduce isn't meant for realtime use, HBase can handle it.On Dec 5, 2009, at 21:45, Joe Stump <email@example.com> wrote:
On Dec 5, 2009, at 7:41 PM, Bill Hastings wrote:
[Is] HBase used for real timish applications and if so any ideas what the largest deployment is.
I don't know of anyone off the top of my head who's using anything built on top of Hadoop for a real-time environment. Hadoop just wasn't built for that. It was built, like MapReduce, for crunching absurd amounts of data across hundreds of nodes in a "reasonable" amount of time.
Just my $0.02.
Over last summer there were some benchmarks included in HBase/Hadoop presentations that showed, IIRC, performance comparable to Cassandra.