Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Aerospike Database 7 vs Cassandra comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

Aerospike Database 7
Ranking in NoSQL Databases
11th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.8
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Cassandra
Ranking in NoSQL Databases
6th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.1
Number of Reviews
24
Ranking in other categories
Vector Databases (14th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of September 2025, in the NoSQL Databases category, the mindshare of Aerospike Database 7 is 3.4%, up from 3.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Cassandra is 8.7%, down from 13.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
NoSQL Databases Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Cassandra8.7%
Aerospike Database 73.4%
Other87.9%
NoSQL Databases
 

Featured Reviews

Manikandan Gunasekaran - PeerSpot reviewer
Boost authentication and session management with reliable and fast data handling
There is a lot of technical debt in our company, and we need to update to the latest versions. The lack of automation in upgrading clusters from development to production is a concern. A tool for automatically handling such upgrades would reduce operational huddle. Additionally, it would be beneficial if Aerospike had a community version to encourage broader adoption and experimentation.
Himanshu Amodwala - PeerSpot reviewer
Well-equipped to handle a massive influx of data and billions of requests
The use of Cassandra in real-time data analytics has been pivotal for our e-commerce platform. As our platform operates 24/7, providing services to sellers and customers alike, the need for real-time updates is paramount. For instance, when a customer leaves comments or feedback on an image, they anticipate an immediate reflection of these changes on the portal. Similarly, sellers altering product attributes or updating images expect instant visibility of these modifications. Handling large data volumes with Cassandra has been an excellent experience. Despite challenges related to the influx, these were not attributed to Cassandra itself but rather to middle-layer issues. Generally, it demonstrated scalability with workloads, thanks to its horizontal scaling capabilities. We could easily add new nodes to the system as needed, ensuring the platform coped well with increasing loads. The tool's most beneficial feature for scalability is its entire architecture. The absence of a single point of failure or a leader within the ecosystem contributes to its robust scalability. This key aspect influenced our decision to opt for the Cassandra ecosystem. In terms of performance, it demonstrated the ability to handle approximately 1.6 billion requests per day. This was achieved on AWS using EC2 instances, and it was during a period about four to five years ago.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"It shows better compression and compaction, which is valuable."
"The time series data was one of the best features along with auto publishing."
"The most valuable feature of Cassandra is its fast retrieval. Additionally, the solution can handle large amounts of data. It is the quickest application we use."
"Can achieve continuous data without a single downtime because of node to node ring architecture."
"I am getting much better performance than relational databases."
"The most valuable features of Cassandra are its scaling capabilities and its non-SQL nature capabilities."
"Cassandra has some features that are more useful for specific use cases where you have time series where you have huge amounts of writes. That should be quick, but not specifically the reads. We needed to have quicker reads and writes and this is why we are using Cassandra right now."
"Cassandra is good. It's better than CouchDB, and we are using it in parallel with CouchDB. Cassandra looks better and is more user-friendly."
"Some of the valued features of this solution are it has good performance and failover."
 

Cons

"The lack of automation in upgrading clusters from development to production is a concern."
"Batching bulk data can cause performance issues."
"The solution is limited to a linear performance."
"While Cassandra can handle NoSQL, I think there should be more flexibility for whole schema design when data is stored in wide columns. Additionally, I believe that eventual consistency should be enhanced."
"It can be difficult to analyze what's going on inside of the database relative to other databases. It can also be difficult to troubleshoot sometimes."
"We found some issues with the batch inserts when the data volume is large."
"Doesn't support a solution that can give aggregation."
"Cassandra could be more user-friendly like MongoDB."
"The secondary index in Cassandra was a bit problematic and could be improved."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"We use around half a TB of data and spend approximately $36,000 to $40,000 USD per year on Aerospike."
"I don't have the specific numbers on pricing, but it was fairly priced."
"We are using the open-source version of Cassandra, the solution is free."
"I use the tool's open-source version."
"We pay for a license."
"There are licensing fees that must be paid, but I'm not sure if they are paid monthly or yearly."
"Cassandra is a free open source solution, but there is a commercial version available called DataStax Enterprise."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which NoSQL Databases solutions are best for your needs.
867,497 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
Financial Services Firm
16%
Computer Software Company
11%
Retailer
7%
Comms Service Provider
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business8
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise13
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Aerospike Database 7?
We use around half a TB of data and spend approximately $36,000 to $40,000 USD per year on Aerospike.
What needs improvement with Aerospike Database 7?
There is a lot of technical debt in our company, and we need to update to the latest versions. The lack of automation in upgrading clusters from development to production is a concern. A tool for a...
What is your primary use case for Aerospike Database 7?
Aerospike is mainly used as the first step for authentication, authorization, and session persistence in our organization. It is a critical part of our workflow, as without it, we wouldn't be able ...
What do you like most about Cassandra?
The use of Cassandra in real-time data analytics has been pivotal for our e-commerce platform. As our platform operates 24/7, providing services to sellers and customers alike, the need for real-ti...
What needs improvement with Cassandra?
While Cassandra can handle NoSQL, I think there should be more flexibility for whole schema design when data is stored in wide columns. Additionally, I believe that eventual consistency should be e...
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

AppNexus, Adform, KAYAK, Williams-Sonoma Inc., The Trade Desk, GREE, BlueKai, Chango CTO, InMobi, Yashi, eXelate CTO, Snapdeal, adMarketplace, Tapad, Komli Media, Neustar, So-net Media Networks, IMHO Vi, Vizury
1. Apple 2. Netflix 3. Facebook 4. Instagram 5. Twitter 6. eBay 7. Spotify 8. Uber 9. Airbnb 10. Adobe 11. Cisco 12. IBM 13. Microsoft 14. Yahoo 15. Reddit 16. Pinterest 17. Salesforce 18. LinkedIn 19. Hulu 20. Airbnb 21. Walmart 22. Target 23. Sony 24. Intel 25. Cisco 26. HP 27. Oracle 28. SAP 29. GE 30. Siemens 31. Volkswagen 32. Toyota
Find out what your peers are saying about MongoDB, Microsoft, ScyllaDB and others in NoSQL Databases. Updated: August 2025.
867,497 professionals have used our research since 2012.