Competitor Comparison

Cassandra vs Aerospike

The table below outlines key technology differences between Aerospike 7.0 and Apache Cassandra 4.1.

Data models

cassandra

Wide column key-value

More detail
Aerospike

Multi-model (key-value, document, graph)

More detail

Implications

Aerospike's efficient support for multiple data models enables firms to use a single data platform for a wide range of applications and business needs.

Scalability options

cassandra

Horizontal scaling is the only option, with data movement and performance impact reduced through multiple techniques.

More detail
Aerospike

Vertical and horizontal scaling. Automatic data movement and automatic rebalancing when adding nodes.

More detail

Implications

For a new deployment, the Aerospike cluster will have fewer nodes and thus lower TCO, easier maintainability, and higher reliability. Additionally, when expanding existing deployments, Aerospike’s horizontal scaling is automatic and without downtime.

Consistency

(CAP Theorem approach)
cassandra

High Availability (AP) mode only.

More detail
Aerospike

Both High Availability (AP) mode and Strong Consistency (CP) mode

More detail

Implications

Having a data platform that can easily enforce strict consistency guarantees while maintaining strong runtime performance enables firms to use one platform to satisfy a wider range of business needs. 

The Aerospike roster approach to consistency requires about half as many servers as Cassandra to handle N failures.

Fault tolerance

cassandra

Three replicas for High Availability. Automated failovers, but requires periodic repairs.

More detail
Aerospike

Two replicas for High Availability. Automated failovers.

More detail

Implications

Achieving high availability with fewer replicas reduces operational costs, hardware costs, and energy consumption. Automated recovery from common failures and self-healing features promote 24x7 operations, helps firms achieve target SLAs, and reduces operational complexity.

Multi-site support

cassandra

Synchronous replication (single cluster can span multiple sites)

Asynchronous replication (across multiple clusters)

More detail
Aerospike

Synchronous replication (single cluster can span multiple sites)

Asynchronous replication across multiple clusters

More detail

Implications

Global enterprises require flexible strategies for operating across geographies. This includes support for continuous operations, fast localized data access, disaster recovery, global transaction processing, and more.

Storage format

cassandra

LSM tree

More detail
Aerospike

Raw block format optimized for SSDs

More detail

Implications

Aerospike’s approach leads to great predictability and reliability without need for more complex configurations needed to improve read performance in LSM-tree databases.

Delivering RAM-like performance with SSDs means Aerospike clusters have fewer nodes. Clusters with fewer nodes have lower TCO, easier maintainability, and higher reliability.

Underlying language

cassandra

Written in Java

More detail
Aerospike

Written in C

More detail

Implications

Aerospike clusters have far fewer nodes than the equivalent Cassandra cluster. They also require less tuning.

Indexing

cassandra

Production-ready primary indexes, limited workaround options for secondary indexes

More detail
Aerospike

Production-ready primary, secondary indexes

More detail

Implications

Both Aerospike and Cassandra have strong primary index support. However, while Cassandra's approach to secondary indexing has been challenging for years, Aerospike's technology has proven its effectiveness in production. This is particularly important for analytical applications, as secondary indexes play a crucial role in speeding up data access when filtering on non-primary key values.

Interoperability

(Ecosystem)
cassandra

Wide range of ready-made connectors available from third parties

More detail
Aerospike

Wide range of ready-made connectors available from Aerospike

More detail

Implications

Making critical business data quickly available to those who need it often requires integration with existing third-party tools and technologies. While connection points are readily available for both Aerospike and Cassandra, Aerospike offers turnkey connectors to many popular technologies to promote fast integration and high-performance data access.

Caching and persistence options

cassandra

Persistent store only (no in-memory only configuration).

More detail
Aerospike

Easily configured as a high-speed cache (in-memory only) or as a persistent store

More detail

Implications

Aerospike’s flexible deployment options enable firms to standardize on its platform for a wide range of applications, reducing the overall complexity of their data management infrastructures and avoid cross-training staff on multiple technologies. Many firms initially deploy Aerospike as a cache to promote real-time access to other systems of record or systems of engagement and later leverage Aerospike’s built-in persistence features to support additional applications.

Multi-tenancy

cassandra

Some multi-tenancy, though it can impact performance

More detail
Aerospike

Various Aerospike server features enable effective multi-tenancy implementations

More detail

Implications

Aerospike has more features to execute multi-tenancy with more control to lessen any unwanted impacts of implementing.

Hardware optimization

cassandra

Designed for commodity (low cost) servers

More detail
Aerospike

Designed to exploit modern hardware and networking technologies

More detail

Implications

Aerospike clusters can manage more aggressive workloads and higher data volumes with fewer nodes than the equivalent Cassandra cluster, reducing operational complexity and TCO.

Change Data Capture

cassandra

Data replication architecture makes CDC complex.

Table granularity with user implementation for log consumption

More detail
Aerospike

Integrated via change notifications with granular data options and automated batch shipments.

More detail

Implications

Aerospike provides more granular options for determining what data changes are captured. This can reduce the cost and improve the latency of moving data between systems. It may be inappropriate for some CDC use cases where frequent updates must be captured since it summarizes multiple local writes. Cassandra’s architecture makes CDC use cases unwieldy.