Cassandra vs ScyllaDB comparison

Read 12 ScyllaDB reviews

2,346 Views
2,323 Comparison Views

91% willing to recommend

Cassandra

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jan 7, 2025

Cassandra and ScyllaDB are both competitors in the NoSQL database space. ScyllaDB seems to have an edge in environments that require high-speed data processing due to its performance optimizations.

Features: Cassandra offers high availability, linear scalability, and a masterless architecture for fault tolerance. ScyllaDB, being built in C++, is optimized for high throughput and low latency, providing efficient resource utilization and performance.

Room for Improvement: Cassandra could improve on reducing setup complexities and performance tuning for specific deployment needs. ScyllaDB may require enhanced ease of use for less experienced users and better transparency in performance metrics for continuous assessment. Both databases could benefit from more comprehensive integration options with other technology stacks.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Cassandra provides extensive documentation and community resources that facilitate its setup process. ScyllaDB offers a streamlined deployment model with built-in monitoring tools. Its customer service is highly responsive, assisting effectively during deployments.

Pricing and ROI: Cassandra usually incurs lower initial setup costs due to its open-source nature. ScyllaDB, while potentially higher in initial investment due to enterprise features, yields better ROI for high-speed data handling and lower latency situations, making it ideal for performance-driven applications.

To learn more, read our detailed Cassandra vs. ScyllaDB Report (Updated: April 2026).

Download the complete report

Cassandra vs. ScyllaDB

April 2026

Helped 893,244 peers since 2012

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:

Categories and Ranking

Cassandra

Ranking in NoSQL Databases

7th

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

6.0

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Vector Databases (14th)

ScyllaDB

Ranking in NoSQL Databases

5th

Average Rating

7.8

Reviews Sentiment

7.0

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2026, in the NoSQL Databases category, the mindshare of Cassandra is 8.2%, down from 10.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of ScyllaDB is 6.6%, down from 10.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

NoSQL Databases Mindshare Distribution
Product	Mindshare (%)
ScyllaDB	6.6%
Cassandra	8.2%
Other	85.2%

NoSQL Databases

Featured Reviews

Monirul Islam Khan

Head, Data Integration & Management at a non-profit with 10,001+ employees

Has maintained secure document storage and efficient data distribution with peer-to-peer architecture

The functions or features in Cassandra that I have found most valuable are that it is a distributed system similar to Mongo. It's good enough for comparison with another SQL database, so it's smooth and organized for distributed database system. The peer-to-peer architecture in Cassandra is helpful for network decentralization, and I have already introduced that feature. Cassandra features in peer-to-peer as well as another monitoring, so basically, it's good enough for our service. The tunable consistency level in Cassandra is good, and we are using that feature already. In terms of built-in caching and lightweight transactions in Cassandra, the transaction level is good, and it's optimized, so there are no more issues in that database. Based on my experience, Cassandra is good for document management system, as well as distributed database system, and the automatic recovery process is there. Additionally, the database monitoring system or auditing system is well-comparable with other database systems, so we are actually happy to be using this Cassandra database.

Read full review

Manikandan Gunasekaran

Director of Engineering at Ola

Reliable data management with great reliability and performance

From a sales pitch standpoint, it needs to deliver on promises of better ROI and compaction. Additionally, ticketing and support systems could be improved due to the time it takes to get answers. There's also an issue with compatibility when attempting to switch back from the enterprise to the community version.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:

Pros

"I am satisfied with the performance; so far it has done fairly well and there haven't been any complaints."

"A consistent solution."

"The most valuable features are the counter features and the NoSQL schema. It also has good scalability. You can scale Cassandra to any finite level."

"I'd rate the solution ten out of ten."

"The time series data was one of the best features along with auto publishing."

"Since I haven't had years of experience with it, it's still new to me. One valuable feature is its distribution, so I can run it partly in the cloud and part on-prem. That's a feature I'd like to use but haven't yet because we're trying to move to Azure. I don't know if or when that will happen. Ideally, we'd have it distributed over the cloud and on-prem simultaneously, so if something happens to our on-prem, we can keep going in the cloud, like a pay-as-you-go model with Azure."

"The most valuable feature of Cassandra is its fast retrieval. Additionally, the solution can handle large amounts of data. It is the quickest application we use."

"The most valuable features of Cassandra are the NoSQL database, high performance, and zero-copy streaming."

More Cassandra pros

"The best features of ScyllaDB are how it synchronizes data and its failover system. There's a unique formula to decide the number of nodes you need and the minimum required, which I find helpful. It also offers encryption and supports APIs, making it great for distributed systems and scaling databases across different regions. While it's easy to use, having prior experience helps configure it properly. There are many configurations; if you don't understand them, you might mess up the design. So, understanding your system's needs, like whether it requires more read or write operations, is crucial for setting up the correct configuration."

"The documentation is good. It integrates easily with our existing data infrastructure."

"I like how fast it is to query data from the ScyllaDB node!"

"The database is easy to use, fast, and accessible for applications because the API is straightforward."

"It is lightweight, and it requires less infrastructure."

"Firstly, if I update something, it's most likely to finish within milliseconds."

"Scalability in performance is good."

"ScyllaDB allows fine-tuning of the table structure. Speed is probably the most critical factor because we perform a lot of heavy data ingestion. One of its core features is its ability to handle high volumes and maintain speed when accessing data. Additionally, high availability and partitioning are built-in features of ScyllaDB."

More ScyllaDB pros

Cons

"Some issues arise from our vendors like Apache slowness and distribution or load balancing from HAProxy, which should better handle consumption for high-level concurrency."

"Depending upon our schema, we can't make ORDER BY or GROUP BY clauses in the product."

"The solution doesn't have joins between tables so you need other tools for that."

"Row-level locking is not available; might be very helpful in update use cases."

"Cassandra can improve by adding more built-in tools. For example, if you want to do some maintenance activities in the cluster, we have to depend on third-party tools."

"There could be more integration, and it could be more user-friendly."

"One of the issues with the solution is that you cannot drop write like you're able to in MongoDB and MySQL, where you can join tables."

"I want Cassandra to update its open-source version more quickly. It's already feature-rich, but I'd appreciate better integration with other NoSQL databases like MariaDB or MongoDB. If I ever need to work with customers or vendors using different NoSQL databases, having native integration in Cassandra would make managing and interacting with their databases much easier."

More Cassandra cons

"From a sales pitch standpoint, it needs to deliver on promises of better ROI and compaction."

"The product needs to add more features and improve the response time of the support team."

"If you don't have the best computing resources, then it's not easy to set up. In such cases, we have to run ScyllaDB in developer mode."

"Support and the availability of support need improvement. I would give them a six out of ten."

"ScyllaDB needs to improve its handling of transactions."

"We faced several challenges while integrating ScyllaDB into our AWS environment. One common issue was that a security port wasn’t opened on one node, preventingdata synchronization across clusters. We noticed the data wasn’t syncing correctly when we saw different record counts in other regions. After investigating, we found that the port was closed in one AWS region. Once we opened the port, the data synchronization across all nodes resumed as expected."

"Some of the regular commands in NoSQL do not work."

"Data export, along with how we can purchase the data periodically, needs to be improved so that the storage is within control. Then, we could optimize it even better."

More ScyllaDB cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"We are using the open-source version of Cassandra, the solution is free."

"I don't have the specific numbers on pricing, but it was fairly priced."

"There are licensing fees that must be paid, but I'm not sure if they are paid monthly or yearly."

"Cassandra is a free open source solution, but there is a commercial version available called DataStax Enterprise."

"We pay for a license."

"I use the tool's open-source version."

"It's free."

"It's a bit expensive."

"I believe that there is a yearly licensing cost and that it's expensive."

"It is an expensive tool compared to its competitor."

"The paid version of ScyllaDB is not that expensive. The main advantage of the paid version is direct support from the ScyllaDB team, which can resolve issues faster—typically within a day, compared to two to three days with the free version. The paid version also offers better guidance and support, while the free version has good documentation and is more high-level. I’d rate their support team nine out of ten because of the quick responses from their community."

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which NoSQL Databases solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

893,244 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

16%

Comms Service Provider

Computer Software Company

Retailer

Outsourcing Company

13%

Financial Services Firm

10%

Comms Service Provider

Manufacturing Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	9
Midsize Enterprise	2
Large Enterprise	14

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	3
Midsize Enterprise	2
Large Enterprise	8

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Cassandra?

The pricing for Cassandra is a little bit high, so it would be better for our community services if they consider community pricing for any non-profit organization like an NGO or other things. It w...

What needs improvement with Cassandra?

Regarding areas of improvement for Cassandra, currently, we are not facing significant issues. Some issues arise from our vendors like Apache slowness and distribution or load balancing from HAProx...

What is your primary use case for Cassandra?

My use case for Cassandra is for a document and other unstructured data management system as well as structured data for ultra-poor member community edition, community members' PII information, so ...

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Scylla?

From what I’ve seen (and experienced), ScyllaDB pricing is very dependent on how you deploy it, and that’s where most of the confusion comes from.

What needs improvement with Scylla?

What is your primary use case for Scylla?

We dump a lot of our data, such as every entry created with respect to when a user rides a scooter, every record gets updated to ScyllaDB. It is used as a single source of truth and it manages mass...

MongoDB Enterprise Advanced vs Cassandra

Comparisons

ClickHouse vs Cassandra

Compared 9% of the time

Compared 8% of the time

Couchbase Enterprise vs Cassandra

Compared 5% of the time

DataStax Enterprise vs Cassandra

Compared 5% of the time

Accumulo vs Cassandra

Compared 4% of the time

More Cassandra Competitors

Redis vs ScyllaDB

Compared 17% of the time

MongoDB Enterprise Advanced vs ScyllaDB

Compared 13% of the time

Apache HBase vs ScyllaDB

Compared 8% of the time

Couchbase Enterprise vs ScyllaDB

Compared 7% of the time

DataStax Enterprise vs ScyllaDB

Compared 7% of the time

More ScyllaDB Competitors

Product Reports

Download Cassandra product report

Cassandra

May 2026

Download ScyllaDB product report

April 2026

Overview

Cassandra is a distributed and scalable database management system used for real-time data processing.

It is highly valued for its ability to handle large amounts of data, scalability, high availability, fault tolerance, and flexible data model.

It is commonly used in finance, e-commerce, and social media industries.

Apache

ScyllaDB is known for its remarkable speed, efficiency, and reliability. It operates with minimal resources, supports large data volumes, and allows for meticulous fine-tuning. Enhanced by Seastar, it offers a performance edge over Cassandra and prioritizes ease of use with robust data synchronization.

ScyllaDB stands out for its capability in high-volume data handling, making it ideal for distributed systems. It integrates easily with APIs and supports user-defined types, providing flexibility through Cassandra SDK and DynamoDB. High availability, effective partitioning, easy updates, and rapid query responses enhance its appeal for organizations dealing with real-time analytics and time-series data management. However, users have noted the complexity in setup compared to MongoDB or Postgres and have highlighted the need for improvements in areas like data export, deletion processes, and documentation. There are also challenges with transactions, support response, compatibility, and AWS integration, with some requiring custom commands which may affect universality.

What are the key features of ScyllaDB?

Exceptional Speed: Achieves high performance through Seastar technology.
Efficiency: Consumes minimal computing resources while supporting substantial data volumes.
Reliability: Offers robust failover systems and data synchronization capabilities.
Flexible Integration: Supports APIs, user-defined types, Cassandra SDK, and DynamoDB.
High Availability: Ensures continuous access and effective partitioning.

Which benefits and ROI should users look for in reviews?

Cost Efficiency: Maximizes resource utilization with minimal expense.
Performance: Provides fast data querying crucial for real-time analytics.
Scalability: Easily manages large-scale and high-volume data needs.
Security: Ensures safe and secure data storage within distributed systems.

Industries like telecommunications, advertising, mobility services, and security implement ScyllaDB for managing extensive datasets and securing real-time data access. Its scalability and efficiency make it a preferred choice for data transformation services, harmonizing complex data flows with real-time analytics needs.

Sample Customers

1. Apple 2. Netflix 3. Facebook 4. Instagram 5. Twitter 6. eBay 7. Spotify 8. Uber 9. Airbnb 10. Adobe 11. Cisco 12. IBM 13. Microsoft 14. Yahoo 15. Reddit 16. Pinterest 17. Salesforce 18. LinkedIn 19. Hulu 20. Airbnb 21. Walmart 22. Target 23. Sony 24. Intel 25. Cisco 26. HP 27. Oracle 28. SAP 29. GE 30. Siemens 31. Volkswagen 32. Toyota

IBM, Investing.com, mParticle, Comcast, GE, Fanatics, Ola, CERN, adgear, Samsung