TrustRadius: an HG Insights company

Save this comparison

Save this comparison

Add Product

Recommended Comparisons

    Overview
    ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price

    Cassandra

    Score9 out of 10
    N/ACassandra is a no-SQL database from Apache.N/A

    MongoDB

    Score8.5 out of 10
    N/AMongoDB is an open source document-oriented database system. It is part of the NoSQL family of database systems. Instead of storing data in tables as is done in a "classical" relational database, MongoDB stores structured data as JSON-like documents with dynamic schemas (MongoDB calls the format BSON), making the integration of data in certain types of applications easier and faster.

    $0.10

    million reads

    Pricing
    CassandraMongoDB
    Editions & Modules
    No answers on this topic
    Shared
    $0
    per month
    Serverless
    $0.10million reads
    million reads
    Dedicated
    $57
    per month
    Offerings
    Pricing Offerings
    CassandraMongoDB
    Free Trial
    NoYes
    Free/Freemium Version
    NoYes
    Premium Consulting/Integration Services
    NoNo
    Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup fee
    Additional Details—Fully managed, global cloud database on AWS, Azure, and GCP
    More Pricing Information
    Community Pulse
    CassandraMongoDB
    Considered Both Products
    Apache
    Chose Cassandra
    Cassandra handles high traffic transactions more powerfully compared to MongoDB.
    Incentivized
    Chose Cassandra
    We evaluated MongoDB also, but don't like the single point failure possibility. The HBase coupled us too tightly to the Hadoop world while we prefer more technical flexibility. Also HBase is designed for "cold"/old historical data lake use cases and is not typically used for …
    Incentivized
    Chose Cassandra
    Apache Cassandra has the best of both worlds, it is a Java based NoSQL, linearly scalable, best in class tunable performance across different workloads, fault tolerant, distributed, masterless, time series database. We have used both Apache HBase and MongoDB for some use cases …
    Incentivized
    Chose Cassandra
    Four years ago, I needed to choose a web-scale database. Having used relational databases for years (PostgreSQL is my favorite), I needed something that could perform well at scale with no downtime. I considered VoltDB for its in-memory speed, but it's limited in scale. I …
    Incentivized
    Chose Cassandra
    DynamoDB is good and is also a truly global database as a service on AWS. However, if your organization is not using AWS, then Cassandra will provide a highly scalable and tuneable, consistent database.
    Cassandra is also fault-tolerant and good for replication across multiple …
    Incentivized
    Chose Cassandra
    Technology selection should be done based on the need and not based on buzz words in the market (google searching). If your data need flat file approach and more searchable based on index and partition keys, then it's better to go for Cassandra. Cassandra is a better choice …
    Incentivized
    Chose Cassandra
    Against HBase, writes were faster. Reads not so much. Also ability to store in other formats would be good (such as objects). Compared to aerospike, does not compare. Aerospike blows it out of water.
    Incentivized
    Chose Cassandra

    These are the features which makes Cassandra different from others:

    • Cassandra is a distributed datastore, with a built-in coordinator. This means that requests are intelligently forwarded to the correct node.
    • It is generally very fast, and especially shines with write heavy …
    Incentivized
    MongoDB
    Chose MongoDB
    We have [measured] the speed in reading/write operations in high load and finally select the winner = MongoDBWe have [not] too much data but in case there will be 10 [times] more we need Cassandra. Cassandra's storage engine provides constant-time writes no matter how big your …
    Incentivized
    Chose MongoDB
    I would say Cassandra is better than MongoDB since it has the backing of Facebook to it. Its inherent properties like versioning put it into the other category of columnar databases, but it's one of the NoSQL databases which you should definitely consider for your organization …
    Incentivized
    Chose MongoDB
    We selected MongoDB because of the following
    • Ease of deployment
    • Use and provisioning on their cloud
    Incentivized
    Chose MongoDB
    MongoDB and Cassandra are both database system from the NoSQL family. MongoDB can be used in lots of use cases while Cassandra has a specific usage. There are some features that MongoDB provides efficiently while Cassandra doesn't and vice-versa. Like, you can update the data …
    Incentivized
    Chose MongoDB
    In the beginning, we considered several products in the market. Since our project was a science and research project, our budget wasn't as big as a commercial project, but still, we wanted the product to be scalable so that we could deal with "smooth transition" from research …
    Incentivized
    Chose MongoDB
    I tried Cassandra, but the performance lags behind MongoDB
    Incentivized
    Chose MongoDB
    From the beginning, we thought we would have a large volume of data, so MongoDB was a natural choice. Next we started the project and found MongoDB is also developing new features that are more like SQL which was very nice for us. As data volume is growing with time, no need to …
    Incentivized
    Chose MongoDB
    Cassandra: may be better for bigger use cases, in PB range, due to our use cases being slightly smaller, we did not need this, but we highly rely on efficient indexing, and low latency, which seemed to be better based on our testing in Mongodb.
    Couchbase Server: Document …
    Incentivized
    Chose MongoDB
    MongoDB provides better performance on a big database. If you prefer to define indexes rather than a map/reduce function, MongoDB is good for you. It's quick to start it up and very easy to learn, basically no entry barrier. MongoDB's community is very welcoming.
    Incentivized
    Chose MongoDB
    I have used KairosDB, Cassandra and MySQL and mongodb proves out to be the best of them. Mainly due to it being a document-oriented database.
    Incentivized
    Chose MongoDB
    We find MongoDB is an easily adoptable NoSQL database.
    Incentivized
    Chose MongoDB
    MongoDB's interface is extremely intuitive and allows [you to] come up from no knowledge to a working deployment with no effort,
    even without a background in the NoSQL world.
    Incentivized
    Chose MongoDB
    We chose MongoDB because it fit our specific use cases better than the other two NoSQL products that I've identified. There are some use cases where those products would be better. Be sure to use the right tool for the job, for us, it was MongoDB, for you it might not be.
    Incentivized
    Chose MongoDB
    I use Cassandra more often these days for best in class performance, tunable consistency, linear scalability. In similar cases, I have used Apache HBase. But if there is a need for document store, MongoDB is the top choice.
    Incentivized
    Chose MongoDB
    Cassandra, CouchDB were master less technology platforms. MongoDB single master per shard is well suited for many business models
    Incentivized
    Key User Insights
    Would buy again
    No answers on this topic
    No answers on this topic
    Delivers good value for the price
    No answers on this topic
    No answers on this topic
    Happy with the feature set
    No answers on this topic
    No answers on this topic
    Lived up to sales and marketing promises
    No answers on this topic
    No answers on this topic
    Implementation went as expected
    No answers on this topic
    No answers on this topic
    TrustRadius Insights
    CassandraMongoDB
    Highlights

    TrustRadius
    Research Team Insight
    Published

    Cassandra and MongoDB are NoSQL databases designed to store large amounts of data in a highly scalable way. Cassandra tends to be used by mid-sized companies and larger enterprises, while MongoDB is a popular choice for companies of all sizes.

    MongoDB is great for smaller businesses due to its affordability and flexible querying. Large enterprises may prefer Cassandra due to its scalability and safeguards against database downtime.

    Features

    Cassandra and MongoDB both have essential NoSQL database features, but they also have some standout features that set them apart.

    Cassandra is a highly scalable database solution that can manage large amounts of unstructured data. Additionally, Cassandra utilizes multiple master nodes, so if one node goes down, data availability doesn’t suffer as long as other nodes are available. Cassandra is easy to set up, even without support, in part due to simple data replication capabilities.

    MongoDB uses a data-oriented data model that makes it straightforward to perform data analysis. Secondary indexes are also supported by MongoDB, which makes querying flexible and fast as long as the queried documents aren’t missing indexes. JavaScript developers will also have an easy time working with MongoDB as it has a robust API with nodeJS.

    Limitations

    Although Cassandra and MongoDB both perform basic NoSQL database functions, they both also have some significant limitations that should be considered.

    Cassandra offers limited support for secondary indexing. As a result, users must query by primary keys. Querying by primary keys limits flexibility in data modeling as data must be structured based on the queries users want to use rather than the structure of the data itself. Administration and management of Cassandra databases can also be taxing as there are frequent rolling updates that are not automated.

    MongoDB’s indexing allows for quick querying if all indexes are present, but nay missing indexes can result in slowdown as each document in a collection needs to be searched. Additionally, MongoDB only has one master node per cluster. If the master node ever goes down, the data it holds will briefly become unavailable until a new node replaces it. Setup for MongoDB is more complicated than Cassandra, so support may be necessary for some organizations.

    Pricing

    Cassandra is an open-source NoSQL database, so the source code is available for free. Various third-party vendors provide hosting and support for Cassandra, so pricing can vary. Depending on storage and support features, some Cassandra vendors start as low as $0.36 per hour.

    MongoDB has official support for three different cloud providers, AWS, Google Cloud, and Azure. Pricing depends on the cloud provider chosen, as well as cluster size and storage requirements. MongoDB pricing can start as low as a few cents per hour.

    Features
    CassandraMongoDB
    NoSQL Databases
    Comparison of NoSQL Databases features of Apache Cassandra and MongoDB
    Feature
    Apache Cassandra
    8.0
    5 Ratings
    MongoDB
    10.0
    39 Ratings
    Performance8.55 Ratings10.039 Ratings
    Availability8.85 Ratings10.039 Ratings
    Concurrency7.65 Ratings10.039 Ratings
    Security8.05 Ratings10.039 Ratings
    Scalability9.55 Ratings10.039 Ratings
    Data model flexibility6.75 Ratings10.039 Ratings
    Deployment model flexibility7.05 Ratings10.038 Ratings
    User Ratings
    CassandraMongoDB
    Likelihood to Recommend
    6.0
    (16 ratings)
    10.0
    (79 ratings)
    Likelihood to Renew
    8.6
    (16 ratings)
    10.0
    (67 ratings)
    Usability
    7.0
    (1 ratings)
    10.0
    (15 ratings)
    Availability
    -
    (0 ratings)
    9.0
    (1 ratings)
    Support Rating
    7.0
    (1 ratings)
    9.6
    (13 ratings)
    Implementation Rating
    7.0
    (1 ratings)
    8.4
    (2 ratings)