ScyllaDB Enterprise

We dump a lot of our data, such as every entry created with respect to when a user rides a scooter, every record gets updated to ScyllaDB . It is used as a single source of truth and it manages massive data. 

We support various business use cases, including mobility, where data about driver allocations get updated. We currently have twenty clusters and more than one hundred nodes.

The performance and scalability are good, and we hardly see any major issues with ScyllaDB . Updates are reliable and help the organization handle large datasets effectively.

To be honest, not really. We were sold on the pitch, offering better compaction and ROI, but we did not experience these benefits.

From a sales pitch standpoint, it needs to deliver on promises of better ROI and compaction. Additionally, ticketing and support systems could be improved due to the time it takes to get answers. There's also an issue with compatibility when attempting to switch back from the enterprise to the community version.

I would say probably five years by now.

The performance and stability are fine. We hardly see any major issues, and from a reliability standpoint, it's all good.

Due to organic growth, we end up upgrading the cluster and adding more nodes. In terms of reliability, it's all good, but specific benefits from scalability were not highlighted.

The technical support and customer service are around a five or six out of ten. Improvements can be made in ticketing and response times.

Neutral

We used to work with Cassandra . During our initial phases, we found ScyllaDB promising due to its implementation language and maintenance, which led us to adopt it over Cassandra .

Migrating to the enterprise version from the community version is straightforward and supported, but moving back to the community version is complex due to compatibility issues.

To be frank, not really. The open-source version sufficed our use case without requiring the costly enterprise version.

The enterprise version comes with a cost of about $300,000 per year, however, we did not experience the promised compaction benefits.

We evaluated Cassandra during initial proof of concepts.

I would suggest using ScyllaDB wisely and adhering to best practices, such as regular cleanup since many engineers tend to expand clusters instead of cleaning up data. I would rate ScyllaDB as eight out of ten.

We use ScyllaDB, a NoSQL database, as a distributed system to store customer data. My last project was in telecommunications, where we stored caller information like phone numbers, names, and scam tags for a scam call protection service. We handled insert, update, and other operations since the back-end AI system needed daily data inputs. We ran scripts to add the data to ScyllaDB across two AWS regions: US East and US West. One Scylla node handled requests, synchronizing data with its peer nodes. During the POC phase, we testedperformance, read/write operations, and latency and chose the right consistency levels for ourneeds. After that, we moved to production.

We are customers, not partners, and we’ve used ScyllaDB to implement an application in our company.

The best features of ScyllaDB are how it synchronizes data and its failover system. There's a unique formula to decide the number of nodes you need and the minimum required, which I find helpful. It also offers encryption and supports APIs, making it great for distributed systems

and scaling databases across different regions. While it's easy to use, having prior experience helps configure it properly. There are many configurations; if you don't understand them, you might mess up the design. So, understanding your system's needs, like whether it requires more read or write operations, is crucial for setting up the correct configuration.

We faced several challenges while integrating ScyllaDB into our AWS environment. One common issue was that a security port wasn’t opened on one node, preventingdata synchronization across clusters. We noticed the data wasn’t syncing correctly when we saw different record counts in other regions. After investigating, we found that the port was closed in one AWS region. Once we opened the port, the data synchronization across all nodes resumed as expected.

I've been using ScyllaDB for the last three years. Initially, we worked on some POC projects and deployed one live project into production.

I've had some stability issues with ScyllaDB. For instance, if one of the nodes in a cluster goes down, sometimes the APIs or command line tools don't work to read the node's status. You might need to restart the node to bring it back up manually. It can be challenging if the node'sstate gets messed up and must be cleaned before re-adding it to the cluster. Based on stability, I'd rate it a seven out of ten. However, since we're using the free version, it might be more stable with the paid version, which could be a nine out of ten.

The paid version of ScyllaDB is not that expensive. The main advantage of the paid version is direct support from the ScyllaDB team, which can resolve issues faster—typically within a day, compared to two to three days with the free version. The paid version also offers better guidance and support, while the free version has good documentation and is more high-level. I’d rate their support team nine out of ten because of the quick responses from their community.

I would recommend ScyllaDB to others. It’s a great product built on Cassandra, with added advantages. For newcomers, it’s a distributed database with excellent scalability and performance and very low latency for all kinds of operations. Overall, I’d rate ScyllaDB an eight out of ten.

We have a business model that requires heavy reads for several applications all in one place. So we decided to use ScyllaDB because of the workload, to have multiple reads and writes at the same time.

I like how fast it is to query data from the ScyllaDB node! Because it can actually enable you to query any data from any node as fast as possible. And the ability to save the same copies of data across the cluster, depending on your setup as well. It's really fast.

Some of the regular commands in NoSQL do not work. It's Cassandra and ScyllaDB, so you have to make custom commands to be able to query data sometimes. It doesn't have universal compatibility. It will not allow you to make use of some functions. So, I have to do custom queries to query data.

I have been using it for about a year now.

I experienced one or two bugs, but for the database itself, it's stable. For other features, such as the ScyllaDB Manager (the one you use to control other nodes, make backups, and check the status of other nodes), there were issues. When you deploy ScyllaDB, you also deploy another instance for the manager that helps you control dashboards and visualizations. 

In the previous release, there were one or two things they had to correct, which sometimes caused unexplainable errors. You had to update to the latest version. But so far, their 3.3 version has been really stable. I updated it last week.

We have about two teams right now, so the number of people would be about eight to ten.

I have contacted the customer service and support. We are trying to move to the enterprise version because the open-source version is limited. 

I think everyone is trying to adopt ScyllaDB, and it's quite new. There isn't enough information on the Internet if you don't have support. So we are considering getting support as well.

ScyllaDB is trying to build their customer base right now. They are very on point. I've just had a few interactions with them, but I strongly agree that the support is very good.

Positive

We had a business model, and we tried to do a bit of research to see which one fits best. Because of ScyllaDB's scalability and high performance, they chose it. 

We are a financial institution and we have relationships with several banks and fintechs. So we have their data in-house, and we try to manipulate this data, derive analytics from it, save it in different forms, and manipulate it. 

ScyllaDB helps us manage high data volumes and support rapid read and write operations. It is also very effective when we demand high throughput with low latency and the ability to scale as fast as possible. 

We had existing databases such as Mongo and SQL Server, but we were having performance issues. We needed something to expand, something to have a broader reach, something to give us more robustness. So that was the reason why we went with ScyllaDB.

The initial setup is pretty easy. They have their documentation cut out really nicely. It's like the more regular installations you have to do for a database cluster. But, yeah, it's pretty easy.

We use the open-source version on-premises, but we're trying to move to the enterprise version. But currently, we are deployed on-premises.

It's a bit expensive. When we were given a quotation for our setup, it was actually quite expensive as well.

If you are not familiar with it at all and you're trying to adopt it for the first time, it's going to be incredibly difficult. It's a journey that we have passed through. Without proper support or without going for the cloud model or the enterprise model where you get support from ScyllaDB, I would advise against going for ScyllaDB.

But if you want to try it out to see what it can do, and you're okay with running without support, I'd say fine, you can use it. It's a really good database.

But if you've explained your business model and what you want to use it for, my first question would be whether you are okay with running without support. If you can't, I would ask you to just look somewhere else for something that works better for you.

Overall, I would rate it an eight out of ten, with one being bad and ten being the best. I haven't really explored the full capabilities of ScyllaDB because without support, you don't know how efficient it can be and how your usage can be. 

The reason why I would say eight is because we've seen firsthand how ScyllaDB is able to manage a high workload. And because of its shared-nothing architecture, it distributes its views and processes.

We use the solution for distributed systems. 

ScyllaDB is fast and reliable. It has good performance. 

The product needs to add more features and improve the response time of the support team. 

I have been using the product for more than a year. 

We haven't faced any issues with the solution's stability. 

The solution's deployment is of medium complexity. 

You need to have database experience to use the product. I rate it a seven out of ten.