incubator-cassandra-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jabbar Azam <aja...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: MySQL Cluster performing faster than Cassandra cluster on single table
Date Wed, 17 Apr 2013 02:56:55 GMT
MySQL cluster also has the index in ram.  So with lots of rows the ram
becomes a limiting factor.

That's what my colleague found and hence why were sticking with Cassandra.
On 16 Apr 2013 21:05, "horschi" <horschi@gmail.com> wrote:

>
>
> Ah, I see, that makes sense. Have you got a source for the storing of
>> hundreds of gigabytes? And does Cassandra not store anything in memory?
>>
> It stores bloom filters and index-samples in memory. But they are much
> smaller than the actual data and they can be configured.
>
>
>>
>> Yeah, my dataset is small at the moment - perhaps I should have chosen
>> something larger for the work I'm doing (University dissertation), however,
>> it is far too late to change now!
>>
> On paper mysql-cluster looks great. But in daily use its not as nice as
> Cassandra (where you have machines dying, networks splitting, etc.).
>
> cheers,
> Christian
>

Mime
View raw message