This makes the decision of Facebook to go with HBase for their new messaging platform back in 2010 all the more strange. Though that was two years ago so things might have changed in Cassandra's favor since then.
This makes the decision of Facebook to go with HBase for their new messaging platform back in 2010 all the more strange. Though that was two years ago so things might have changed in Cassandra's favor since then.
Speed isn't everything to a database. AFAIK they chose HBase over Cassandra because of consistency guarantees: eventual consistency is a bad choice for a messaging platform.
Strange you would mention that in the context of Cassandra, since it allows for per-read/write configuration of consistency, from "eventual" to "strong". You get exactly what you ask for with Cassandra, whether its availability or consistency.
AFAIK, HBase only supports strong consistency.
http://rubyscale.com/blog/2011/03/06/basic-time-series-with-...
http://www.datastax.com/dev/blog/advanced-time-series-with-c...
This paper does not reflect what I have seen in production setups.
Disclaimer: HBase developer here.