Difference Between Cassandra and HBase (With Table)

Both Cassandra and HBase are non-relational database management systems developed by Apache Software Foundation. They both are column-oriented database management systems. These databases have a lot in common, but when taken a closer look, they have many different properties, which are important to be aware of before choosing the perfect database which is suitable for your work.

Cassandra vs HBase

The difference between Cassandra and HBase is that Cassandra can help with storage as well as with data management, whereas HBase is only fit for data management. Cassandra has built-in technologies, whereas HBase depends on other technologies for status management. Cassandra never faces downtimes, whereas HBase does due to its master-based architecture.

Cassandra is a column-based database management system. It is used to store and manage large amounts of data. Cassandra is an open-source project originally developed by Facebook. Cassandra is very used by several companies, and it is highly trustable as it has no point of failure.

HBase is also a column-based management system. It works dynamically, which makes it easier to insert and modify data at any point in time. It consists of column families, which are further divided into rows so as store data in different regions.

Comparison Table Between Cassandra and HBase

Parameters of ComparisonCassandraHBase
Data redundancyIt sometimes can cause data redundancy.It does not lead to data redundancy.
TechnologiesIt has built-in technologies.It depends on other technologies.
Availability It is always available for data analytics.It sometimes can face downtimes.
UseIt is used by companies like Salesforce, Nike, Century Link, etc.It can be used by companies like Facebook, Instagram, Netflix, etc.
Based onIt is not master-based, and each node is completely independent of the other.It is master-based.

What is Cassandra?

Cassandra is a non-relational database management system. It can handle and manage huge amounts of both structured and non-structured data. Cassandra consists of multiple nodes, with each node connected to the other node to form a cluster.

Cassandra has a masterless architecture which basically means that each node in Cassandra is independent and is a master of its own. It also ensures Cassandra would never lead to downtimes which sometimes can occur on master-based management systems.

It replicates data throughout several data centers, which lessens the time for data to reach its required destination over any network. It ensures reliability and stability as it has been tested on clusters with a huge amount of nodes.

Cassandra consists of a table referred to as a column family. Each table further consists of key spaces. Each keyspace can be related to similar topics or similar types of data. Each table in Cassandra has a primary key which is divided into clustering columns and partition keys.

Data partitioning plays a huge role in Cassandra. Cassandra is an overall reliable database management system. According to researches, Cassandra ranks to be one of the top among all data management systems available globally.

What is HBase?

HBase is also a non-relational database. It manages data very efficiently. HBase is written in java language. Like any regular database, it comprises tables with rows and columns. It has a primary key.

HBase runs on top of Hadoop, which provides it the ability to store enormous amounts of data. HBase is very consistent when it comes to data handling. It does not lead to data redundancy as it writes and reads data only from one place. It does not cause data to repeat itself.

It easily finds, reads, and writes data as it stores data only on one node making all data-related functions very fast and reliable. HBase is a very good option if someone wants proper storage and access to data, and the time of execution is not a factor.

HBase is master-based which means all the nodes in HBase work under a master node. The only case where an HBase cluster could fail is when the master node fails. Hence HBase has one condition of downtime. Overall, HBase is very good at reading and maintaining data.

Main Differences Between Cassandra and HBase

  1. Cassandra is based on no master node. Each node is Cassandra is connected to all the other notes present. Hence all nodes are independent and do not rely on any other particular node. However, HBase is master-based which means there is a master node present that is connected to each and every node.
  2. Cassandra has no chance of downtimes due to the large no of independent nodes. HBase has a chance of downtime in case the master node fails to perform.
  3. Cassandra can sometimes cause data redundancy as it saves data in chunks in several nodes. HBase is very good at preventing data repetition or loss of data.
  4. Cassandra is always ready and available for any time analytics, whereas if there is no rush, HBase could be the best choice.
  5. Cassandra is self-sufficient with all in-built technologies, whereas HBase is dependent on other technologies such as Zookeeper for its server.

Conclusion

Cassandra and Hbase are both non-relational column-based database systems. They are equally efficient in data management. Both of them are quite popular database management systems used by several companies to manage data. However, factors like data redundancy, all-time availability, number of nodes can play a big role in choosing a perfect database for a particular company.

Cassandra is always ready, and time is not its barrier. However, HBase is very good at maintaining data and reducing its duplication. Hbase depends on other technologies for its effective working, whereas Cassandra is self-enough. Overall it could be said that both are very worthy as a database management system. However, the needs of one should be properly analyzed before making a choice between these two.

Refrences

  1. https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/abstract/document/6182030/
  2. https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/abstract/document/7207225/
  3. https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/abstract/document/6182030/
x
2D vs 3D