ALL COVERED TOPICS

NoSQL Benchmarks NoSQL use cases NoSQL Videos NoSQL Hybrid Solutions NoSQL Presentations Big Data Hadoop MapReduce Pig Hive Flume Oozie Sqoop HDFS ZooKeeper Cascading Cascalog BigTable Cassandra HBase Hypertable Couchbase CouchDB MongoDB OrientDB RavenDB Jackrabbit Terrastore Amazon DynamoDB Redis Riak Project Voldemort Tokyo Cabinet Kyoto Cabinet memcached Amazon SimpleDB Datomic MemcacheDB M/DB GT.M Amazon Dynamo Dynomite Mnesia Yahoo! PNUTS/Sherpa Neo4j InfoGrid Sones GraphDB InfiniteGraph AllegroGraph MarkLogic Clustrix CouchDB Case Studies MongoDB Case Studies NoSQL at Adobe NoSQL at Facebook NoSQL at Twitter

NAVIGATE MAIN CATEGORIES

Close

Membase: Pros and Cons

German Eichberger’s notes after a Membase talk:

Membase doesn’t have many of the fancy features other No-SQL databases offer. They don’t have a query language nor some map-reduce and even no automatic failover.

He goes on listing Membase pros and cons:

  • Pros:
    • memcached on steroids
    • fast
    • highly distributable
    • (kind of) consistent
    • easy administration and setup
    • uses the memcached protocol
    • “tap-interface” allowing 3rd party modules to look into all the data in the cluster

      nb: I think he’s referring to “Tap stream”: a publish/subscribe mechanism (supporting some level of filtering)

  • Cons:

    • a node will confirm that it has stored a value before it distributes it to other nodes and writes it to disk
    • a node failure requires an administrator to manually remove or restore the node
    • no details about the behavior in case of network splits
    • no support for multi-datacenter deployments

Comparing the points about with my short review of what is Membase, there might be some innacuracies in this list related to Membase writes and also node failure behavior. But I haven’t watched the talk, so maybe German is right.

Original title and link: Membase: Pros and Cons (NoSQL databases © myNoSQL)