Re:InfluxDB 1.0 GA Released: A Retrospective and What’s Next
by rkatan on Thursday September 08, 2016 @04:03PM
(#12456770)
We dropped InfluxDB after they introduced their enterprise version.
Currently, we are running several nodes of Riemann/Cyanite/Cassandra.
It works very well, integration is pretty straight forward.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:InfluxDB 1.0 GA Released: A Retrospective and What’s Next
by erichocean on Thursday September 08, 2016 @04:30PM
(#12456990)
That stack would perform even better if you swapped ScyllaDB for Cassandra.
Re:InfluxDB 1.0 GA Released: A Retrospective and What’s Next
by alexandre_m on Thursday September 08, 2016 @10:50PM
(#12459346)
Do you have production experience with ScyllaDB?
I wanted to use this for a while. Can we consider it 100% compatible and can be used as a drop-in replacement?
Re:InfluxDB 1.0 GA Released: A Retrospective and What’s Next
by erichocean on Friday September 09, 2016 @01:34AM
(#12459831)
I've not yet used in in production, but I have kicked the tires enough to know that a) it's (much) faster, and b) I'm planning a production deployment this fall.
For the most part it's compatible with Cassandra out-of-the-box, i.e. many well-known frameworks that run on top of Cassandra "just work". The main thing it's missing is support for Lightweight Transactions (scheduled for the 2.0 release).
The dev team behind ScyllaDB is rock solid, very competent.