本文是小编为大家收集整理的关于伏地魔与卡桑德拉相比如何？的处理/解决方法，可以参考本文帮助大家快速定位并解决问题，中文翻译不准确的可切换到English标签页查看源文。
问题描述
我不是在谈论社区的大小，只想听到实际使用两者的人.
特别是我对:
感兴趣- 他们在添加和删除节点时如何动态扩展
- 查询性能
- 他们在添加节点时如何扩展?
- 写速度
推荐答案
Voldemort最近(本月)刚刚添加了添加节点的支持.因此，我希望卡桑德拉(Cassandra)的烹饪时间更长和更大的社区测试.
两者都是快速的(>每台机器10k OPS/s).由于他们的储存设计，我希望卡桑德拉在写信方面会更快，并且伏地魔在读取方面的速度更快.我还希望卡桑德拉(Cassandra)的性能会随着每个节点的数据增加而降低降解.当然，如果您不仅需要密钥/价值数据模型Cassandra的ColumnFomily Model Win.
我不知道自去年6月为NOSQL SF所做的一个主题标准测试，这发现Cassandra在他使用的任何工作负载组合中都会更快. ( http://blog.oskarsson.nu/2009/06/nosql-debrief.html )8个月是一个永恒的，在这一大部分发展下.
其他推荐答案
一些其他评论:
- 关于写速速度，卡桑德拉应该更快 - 它的编写速度比阅读更快(您可以避免由于完成专门的方式存储而避免立即命中命中率) )
但是，我认为实际上的主要区别实际上不是性能，而是功能集:伏地魔严格来说是一个关键/值存储(当前无论如何)，而卡桑德拉可以提供范围查询(带有订单的分区者)，以及围绕数据的更多结构(专栏家庭等).前者是设计的重要考虑因素；后者少于IMO，您总是可以在客户端构建BLOB数据.
问题描述
How does Voldemort compare to Cassandra?
I'm not talking about size of community and only want to hear from people who have actually used both.
Especially I'm interested in:
- How they dynamically scale when adding and removing nodes
- Query performance
- How they scale when adding nodes (linear)?
- Write speed
推荐答案
Voldemort's support for adding nodes was just added recently (this month). So I would expect Cassandra's to be more robust given the longer time to cook and a larger community testing.
Both are fast (> 10k ops/s per machine). Because of their storage designs, I would expect Cassandra to be faster at writes, and Voldemort to be faster at reads. I would also expect Cassandra's performance to degrade less as the amount of data per node increases. And of course if you need more than just a key/value data model Cassandra's ColumnFamily model wins.
I don't know of any head-to-head benchmarks since the one done for NoSQL SF last June, which found Cassandra to be somewhat faster at whatever workload mix he was using. (The "vpork" talk from http://blog.oskarsson.nu/2009/06/nosql-debrief.html) 8 months is an eternity with projects under this much development, though.
其他推荐答案
Some additional comments:
- Regarding write speed, Cassandra should be faster -- it is designed to be faster to write than read (you can avoid immediate disk hit for writes due to specialized way storage is done)
But main difference I think is actually not performance but feature set: Voldemort is strictly a key/value store (currently anyway), whereas Cassandra can offer range queries (with order-preserving partitioner), and bit more structure around data (column families etc). Former is an important consideration for design; latter IMO less so, you can always structure BLOB data on client side.
更多相关问答
联系站长