Apache HBase vs. Neo4j

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
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.N/A
Neo4j
Score 9.8 out of 10
N/A
Neo4j is an open source embeddable graph database developed by Neo Technologies based in San Mateo, California with an office in Sweden.
$65
per month
Pricing
Apache HBaseNeo4j
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
Aura Professional
$65
per month
Community Edition
Free
Enterprise Edition
Contact Sales
Aura Free
Free
Aura Enterprise
Contact Sales
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
HBaseNeo4j
Free Trial
NoYes
Free/Freemium Version
NoYes
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup fee
Additional Details
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Apache HBaseNeo4j
Considered Both Products
HBase
Chose HBase
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.
Chose HBase
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 …
Chose HBase
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 …
Chose HBase
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.

HBase has superior …
Chose HBase
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 …
Chose HBase
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.
Neo4j
Chose Neo4j
I have not used anything like Neo4J because of how unique it is in the work that it allows me to do. I am not aware of any other graph database platforms and it might be because it is a growing area (especially in the world of pharmaceuticals). I would be open to trying other …
Chose Neo4j
  • For easy query language and better graphical representation on small dataset
  • Also easy to set up and handle on the server.
  • On top of that Neo4j also provides an API support to interact through any system.
Chose Neo4j
Neo4j is a graph store and has different use cases compared to another NoSQL Document store like MongoDB. MongoDB is a bad choice when joins are common as existing operators for joining two documents (similar to tables in a relational store) as Mongo 3.5 use SQL like join …
Chose Neo4j
Neo4j is ahead of any of the leading competitors I know. The only one which comes close, in my opinion, is the "Titan-Distributed Graph Database" which is completely open source and free to use. Titan works on top of Apache Cassandra so it has some huge learning curves to do, …
Chose Neo4j
We've done some BOE comparisons between Neo4j, Titan, and OrientDB. The general consensus was that Titan is too unweildy and that Neo4j beat out OrientDB by being more active and having a large community.
Features
Apache HBaseNeo4j
NoSQL Databases
Comparison of NoSQL Databases features of Product A and Product B
Apache HBase
7.7
Ratings
14% below category average
Neo4j
-
Ratings
Performance7.10 Ratings00 Ratings
Availability7.80 Ratings00 Ratings
Concurrency7.00 Ratings00 Ratings
Security7.80 Ratings00 Ratings
Scalability8.60 Ratings00 Ratings
Data model flexibility7.10 Ratings00 Ratings
Deployment model flexibility8.20 Ratings00 Ratings
Best Alternatives
Apache HBaseNeo4j
Small Businesses
IBM Cloudant
IBM Cloudant
Score 7.4 out of 10
IBM Cloudant
IBM Cloudant
Score 7.4 out of 10
Medium-sized Companies
IBM Cloudant
IBM Cloudant
Score 7.4 out of 10
IBM Cloudant
IBM Cloudant
Score 7.4 out of 10
Enterprises
IBM Cloudant
IBM Cloudant
Score 7.4 out of 10
IBM Cloudant
IBM Cloudant
Score 7.4 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
Apache HBaseNeo4j
Likelihood to Recommend
7.7
(0 ratings)
2.1
(0 ratings)
Likelihood to Renew
7.9
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Usability
-
(0 ratings)
6.0
(0 ratings)
User Testimonials
Apache HBaseNeo4j
Likelihood to Recommend
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.
Read full review
Its very well suited for storing graph types relationship information, such as a group of people and their relationships. Data modeling this sort of information in a traditional SQL database is a pain and inefficient. Using Neo4J allows for efficient modeling of data while providing rich querying capabilities using Cypher. Its also a great fit for any programming language because of its support for REST API. It's less appropriate for any other data structure other than Graph data. So as with any DB, evaluate the data structure and query and if the querying revolves around relationships, then Neo4J is a fit. If there is more need for looking up individual nodes and their associated information, Neo4J might not be the most efficient solution in the market.
Read full review
Pros
  • Scalable and truly non-relational data
  • HBase operations run in real-time on its database rather than MapReduce jobs
  • Scales linearly to support billions of rows with millions of columns
Read full review
  • When joins are a common in a relational store, switching to Neo4j is better
  • When pattern matching and surfacing interesting insights is the goal, neo4j's cypher is pretty powerful
  • When schema is not completely known beforehand and needs to be evolved with time
Read full review
Cons
  • Write performance
  • Performance support for parquet file format. supports, but performance wise still not there
  • API / library availability for spark, rather than creating a new library for it
Read full review
  • It would be nice to have some concept of namespaces, or some way of roughly making a single instance multi-tenant. It'd be nice to make sandboxing easier.
  • Automatic backups could be improved.
Read full review
Likelihood to Renew
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.
Read full review
No answers on this topic
Usability
No answers on this topic
[Based on] Query Language, Performance on small and large data sets, integration and deployment, analysis, API support, Interactive UI.
Read full review
Alternatives Considered
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
Read full review
I have not used anything like Neo4J because of how unique it is in the work that it allows me to do. I am not aware of any other graph database platforms and it might be because it is a growing area (especially in the world of pharmaceuticals). I would be open to trying other softwares though.
Read full review
Return on Investment
  • Positive: Open source, easy to use, good to store big data.
  • Negative: SQL functionalities are not available.
  • More memory utilization
  • More troubleshooting
Read full review
  • For experimentation purposes, it had a positive impact on my company. It was very natural to work with Neo4j and so intuitive to visualize the data.
  • Neo4j community edition is free, which is what we experimented on. So there was no investment up front apart from employee's time. But this quickly gave results and it was time well spent.
  • Neo4j is a cool but very new technology. It was hard to have people onboard, especially some of the leadership and relational folks.
Read full review
ScreenShots