Apache HBase vs. Redis Software

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
Redis Software
Score 8.3 out of 10
N/A
Redis is an open source in-memory data structure server and NoSQL database.N/A
Pricing
Apache HBaseRedis Software
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
HBaseRedis Software
Free Trial
NoYes
Free/Freemium Version
NoYes
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeOptional
Additional Details
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Apache HBaseRedis Software
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.
Redis Software
Chose Redis Software
Redis Software has a simpler data model than Aerospike.
Memcached doesn't provide any data structures.
Chose Redis Software
UI isn't that great compared to the other competitors.
The management of our memcached cluster was becoming pretty complicated as the application grew in size. Redis is a much better option compared to memcached.
Redis is bit unreliable compared to the alternative RabbitMQ …
Chose Redis Software
We divide projects between Redis and Elasticsearch Service. In some parts or modules one of these two databases fit better than the other.
Chose Redis Software
Alibaba Cloud Elastic Compute Service (ECS) and Amazon ElastiCache
Chose Redis Software
All are good products. MongoDB is a great NoSQL DB but didn't seem to have the high performance caching of Redis. Coherence and Xtreme Scale are expensive. In my opinion for our particular use case, Redis was the clear winner.
Chose Redis Software
Redis is faster, provides documents JSON-wise with the proper odule and it is far more stable than Mongodb (we had really bad experiences with Mongo, especially when ops tends to increase).
Chose Redis Software
DynamoDB is a fully managed key-value store by Amazon. It provides more powerful indexing to the tables, which certainly increases the performance if searching is what you need. However, it is also a lot more expensive to use compared to Redis. If your use case is more on the …
Chose Redis Software
We evaluated Oracle and at first it seems competitive but after the contract term pricing would jump. Heard this from business associates and online communities
Chose Redis Software
Microsoft SQL requires a lot of resources to run at its optimal performance level. Redis runs faster search queries at a reduced cost.
Chose Redis Software
ElastiCache also offers Redis, but it's quite cryptic and you have to pay for support separately (it's quite expensive as well). With Redis Enterprise we were able to set-up our cluster with constant support from their team, and we were even able to set-up a particular set of …
Chose Redis Software
We initially used Memcached for some of the caching and locking solutions we now use Redis for; we found that for the purposes of our system Memcache could not match up to Redis for performance. We also found Redis to be a bit more reliable, but that could have just been down …
Chose Redis Software
I can't evaluate. I didn't use them personally.
Chose Redis Software
We selected Redis over Memcached because Redis provided more client processing options and better server handling with its computations.
Chose Redis Software
We are big users of MySQL and PostgreSQL. We were looking at replacing our aging web page caching technology and found that we could do it in SQL, but there was a NoSQL movement happening at the time. We dabbled a bit in the NoSQL scene just to get an idea of what it was about …
Chose Redis Software
We initially tried ElastiCache with Redis hosting. While it did the job of running Redis, we still had to deal with server sizing. We switched to Redis Cloud since that had auto-scaling and easy to use tools.
Chose Redis Software
It's cheaper than Microsoft Azure offerings.
Chose Redis Software
We prefer DynamoDB whenever possible. We have more predictable performance at the tail end, better isolation and cheaper costs per GB of storage.
Chose Redis Software
Redshift has relatively high latency and thus produces unscalable solution.
Chose Redis Software
MemSQL is awesome and really fast, but extremely expensive.
Features
Apache HBaseRedis Software
NoSQL Databases
Comparison of NoSQL Databases features of Product A and Product B
Apache HBase
7.7
Ratings
14% below category average
Redis Software
8.6
Ratings
3% below category average
Performance7.10 Ratings9.00 Ratings
Availability7.80 Ratings7.00 Ratings
Concurrency7.00 Ratings9.00 Ratings
Security7.80 Ratings8.00 Ratings
Scalability8.60 Ratings9.00 Ratings
Data model flexibility7.10 Ratings9.00 Ratings
Deployment model flexibility8.20 Ratings9.00 Ratings
Best Alternatives
Apache HBaseRedis Software
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 HBaseRedis Software
Likelihood to Recommend
7.7
(0 ratings)
8.0
(0 ratings)
Likelihood to Renew
7.9
(0 ratings)
8.7
(0 ratings)
Usability
-
(0 ratings)
9.0
(0 ratings)
Support Rating
-
(0 ratings)
8.7
(0 ratings)
Implementation Rating
-
(0 ratings)
7.3
(0 ratings)
User Testimonials
Apache HBaseRedis Software
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
Perfect solution for caching needs. If you have a bottleneck due to frequent data access to your database, then Redis can really help you by diverting those traffic away from your database. Its key/value pair structure also makes data lookup very efficient, providing excellent performance.
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
  • Easy for developers to understand. Unlike Riak, which I've used in the past, it's fast without having to worry about eventual consistency.
  • Reliable. With a proper multi-node configuration, it can handle failover instantly.
  • Configurable. We primarily still use Memcache for caching but one of the teams uses Redis for both long-term storage and temporary expiry keys without taking on another external dependency.
  • Fast. We process tens of thousands of RPS and it doesn't skip a beat.
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
  • Redis is super fast but it comes with a cost. Whole dataset resides in RAM. So it can be costly as primary memory is more costly, then secondary ones.
  • Persistence issues: To achieve it, Redis uses a memory dump to create a persistence snapshot, that's cool. But it requires some Linux Kernel tweaking to avoid performance degradation while the Redis server process is forking. This further causes latency.
  • Master-slave structure side effect: Master-slave architecture comes with its own side effects. Please note that there will be only one master with multiple slaves for replication. All writing goes to the master, which creates more load on the master node. So, when the master goes down, the whole architecture does.
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
We will definitely continue using Redis because: 1. It is free and open source. 2. We already use it in so many applications, it will be hard for us to let go. 3. There isn't another competitive product that we know of that gives a better performance. 4. We never had any major issues with Redis, so no point turning our backs.
Read full review
Usability
No answers on this topic
It is quite simple to set up for the purpose of managing user sessions in the backend. It can be easily integrated with other products or technologies, such as Spring in Java. If you need to actually display the data stored in Redis in your application this is a bit difficult to understand initially but is possible.
Read full review
Support Rating
No answers on this topic
The support team has always been excellent in handling our mostly questions, rarely problems. They are responsive, find the solution and get us moving forward again. I have never had to escalate a case with them. They have always solved our problems in a very timely manner. I highly commend the support team.
Read full review
Implementation Rating
No answers on this topic
Whitelisting of the AWS lambda functions.
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
UI isn't that great compared to the other competitors. The management of our memcached cluster was becoming pretty complicated as the application grew in size. Redis is a much better option compared to memcached. Redis is bit unreliable compared to the alternative RabbitMQ especially when it needs to be integrated with Celery.
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
  • Existing tools like Redisson that were built over Redis reduced dev time in solving challenging problems, which had a positive impact on ROI.
  • We initially misused Redis for persistent storage which had a negative impact on ROI because we were paying a lot for inactive users.
  • The increased performance we achieved using Redis in areas like locking helped us improve the performance of our system reducing the likelihood of system timeouts.
Read full review
ScreenShots

Redis Software Screenshots

Screenshot of Database configurationScreenshot of Database metricsScreenshot of DatabasesScreenshot of NodesScreenshot of Alerts