Apache Drill is a schema-free query engine for use with NoSQL or Hadoop data or file storage systems and databases.
N/A
HBase
Score 7.3 out of 10
N/A
The Apache HBase project's goal is the hosting of very large tables -- billions of rows X millions of columns -- atop clusters of commodity hardware. Apache HBase is an open-source, distributed, versioned, non-relational database modeled after Google's Bigtable.
compared to presto, has more support than prestodb. Impala has limitations to what drill can support apache phoenix only supports for hbase. no support for cassandra.
HBase is more secure. Easily scalable. HBase is for wide-column store while MongoDB is for document store. Triggers available in HBase while in Mongodb triggers are not available.
Cassandra os great for writes. But with large datasets, depending, not as great as HBASE. Cassandra does support parquet now. HBase still performance issues. Cassandra has use cases of being used as time series. HBase, it fails miserably. GeoSpatial data, Hbase does work …
Compared NoSQL databases with traditional databases for faster retrieval and consistency. As MongoDB is a NoSQL supports dynamic fields, however, query performance is bad for aggregations and added maintenance. When compared with MySql and Teradata, it could not scale up as …
HBase is what you should use if you want a production ready scalable, JSON friendly, key-value, NoSQL, enterprise storage option. It excels over MongoDB due to integration with the extensive Hadoop stack and all the tools, frameworks and benefits there.
Typically, Cassandra is faster on reads and HBase is faster on writes. You use Cassandra when you want to use a website, HBase is just an overall good general use database engine. Cassandra has its own storage engine and HBase uses HDFS and all its benefits. MongoDB is …
These days I use Apache Cassandra more for even more scalability, good performance under different kind of workloads, and for providing highly available systems. Apache Cassandra also has connectors for Hadoop, Spark, and Solr.
if you're doing joins from hBASE, hdfs, cassandra and redis, then this works. Using it as a be all end all does not suit it. This is not your straight forward magic software that works for all scenarios. One needs to determine the use case to see if Apache Drill fits the needs. 3/4 of the time, usually it does.
HBase is well suited for streaming ingest, fast lookups, massive datasets, data warehouse lookup tables, RDBMS replacement, MongoDB replacement, key-value store, data scans, logs, JSON storage and some binary storage. My preferred use case is for storing data points like time series or data produced by sensors. I often use HBase when I need data available immediately and I am not looking for transactions. This is a great store for really wide tables with tons of columns. It is also great if you are not sure what type of data you are going to have. It really excels at sparse data.
if Presto comes up with more support (ie hbase, s3), then its strongly possible that we'll move from apache drill to prestoDB. However, Apache drill needs more configuration ease, especially when it comes to garbage collection tuning. If apache drill could support also sparkSQL and Flume, then it does change drill into being something more valuable than prestoDB
There's really not anything else out there that I've seen comparable for my use cases. HBase has never proven me wrong. Some companies align their whole business on HBase and are moving all of their infrastructure from other database engines to HBase. It's also open source and has a very collaborative community.
compared to presto, has more support than prestodb. Impala has limitations to what drill can support apache phoenix only supports for hbase. no support for cassandra. Apache drill was chosen, because of the multiple data stores that it supports htat the other 3 do not support. Presto does not support hbase as of yet. Impala does not support query to cassandra
Compared NoSQL databases with traditional databases for faster retrieval and consistency. As MongoDB is a NoSQL supports dynamic fields, however, query performance is bad for aggregations and added maintenance. When compared with MySQL and Teradata, it could not scale up as fast as Hbase and added cost involved to it. HBase can be easily scalable to a huge volume of records, have a faster lookup and provides consistency