When assessing the two solutions, reviewers found MongoDB easier to use, set up, and administer. Reviewers also preferred doing business with MongoDB overall.
Cassandra runs in a single daemon; there is no complex set of configuration, locking, and other services to get it running. The support for using x.509 certificates and TLS for cluster communication is cloud-friendly (because it doesn't require constant...
Poor performance (suffering from JVM usage), needs a large node count to handle writes (it does not fit well with fewer nodes using larger machines).
- Ease of use - Easy to become productive - Easy indexing - Easy to install - Query language - Easy to scale - I was able to implement a polyglot solution combining MongoDB and Neo4j, a graphdb. The architecture has not fundamentally changed since...
rs.reconfigs causing unnecessary outages even when they are not supposed to for example removing a dead member from the set
Cassandra runs in a single daemon; there is no complex set of configuration, locking, and other services to get it running. The support for using x.509 certificates and TLS for cluster communication is cloud-friendly (because it doesn't require constant...
- Ease of use - Easy to become productive - Easy indexing - Easy to install - Query language - Easy to scale - I was able to implement a polyglot solution combining MongoDB and Neo4j, a graphdb. The architecture has not fundamentally changed since...
Poor performance (suffering from JVM usage), needs a large node count to handle writes (it does not fit well with fewer nodes using larger machines).
rs.reconfigs causing unnecessary outages even when they are not supposed to for example removing a dead member from the set