noSQL Benchmarking

참고 URL. http://www.cubrid.org/blog/dev-platform/nosql-benchmarking/

1. All three products showed better throughput in INSERT.
2. Cassandra showed outstanding throughput in INSERT-only with 20,000 ops.
3. HBase also presented relatively good performance in INSERT-only.
4. The products did not show large differences with READ-only than INSERT-only.
5. HBase’s performance was better than Cassandra in READ-only.
6. Cassandra’s performance in READ-and-UPDATE was better than the other two products. Cassandra’s READ-and-UPDATE might have been higher than READ-only due to Cassandra’s excellent insert throughout.
7. MongoDB’s throughout in all three conditions was the lowest of the three products. MongoDB, which uses the Memory Mapped File (mmap), probably showed poor performance because the large data size exceeded the physical memory size.

Let’s take a look at why each product showed such difference in performance.