ClickHouse VS Cassandra: A Detailed Comparison

ClickHouse and Cassandra are two databases well known for handling large-scale data. ClickHouse is primarily used for real-time analytics, whereas Cassandra is mainly chosen for its strong write performance and fault tolerance in distributed environments.

This article compares ClickHouse and Cassandra in detail. It covers their architecture, performance, scalability, and best use cases. By the end, you’ll have a clear understanding of which database suits your needs best.

Overview of ClickHouse

ClickHouse is a columnar analytical database developed by Yandex. It is widely used for real-time data processing, particularly in applications requiring high-speed queries over large data sets. ClickHouse is optimized for read-heavy workloads and performs exceptionally well in several analytical use cases.

Here are some of its key features:

  • It stores data in columns, which makes analytical queries much faster than traditional row-based databases.
  • It can process large amounts of data in real time, which makes it ideal for business intelligence, reporting, machine learning, and generative AI.
  • It comes with advanced compression techniques that reduce storage costs while improving speed.
  • It supports distributed clusters that allow it to seamlessly scale horizontally.
  • It supports a declarative SQL-like query language, which reduces the learning curve for new developers.

Even though ClickHouse is very versatile and feature-rich, it’s primarily used for business intelligence and reporting, real-time analytics on large data sets, log and event data processing, financial and marketing data analysis, and time-series data analysis.

ClickHouse is open-source, meaning you can use the self-hosted version for free. However, there is also a paid service, ClickHouse Cloud, with pricing that depends on storage, compute usage, and data transfer. The cloud version offers easier management and scaling but can become expensive for businesses with high data ingestion rates. If cost is a concern, a self-managed ClickHouse setup on your own infrastructure can be a better option.

Overview of Cassandra

Apache Cassandra is a highly scalable NoSQL database designed for high availability and fault tolerance. It was originally developed at Facebook, but is now an open-source project under the Apache Foundation.

Here are some of its key features:

  • It’s designed to run on multiple nodes, which makes it highly available and fault-tolerant.
  • It’s optimized for high-speed write operations, making it ideal for real-time applications.
  • It can scale horizontally across many servers without a single point of failure.
  • It uses a schema-free model, which makes it easy to handle unstructured and semi-structured data.
  • It follows a decentralized model to ensure data availability, even in case of failures.
  • It follows a wide-column store model, which is more flexible than relational databases.

Some of Cassandra’s popular use cases are: high-speed transaction logging, IoT data storage, messaging systems and recommendation engines, and any applications that require high availability and fault tolerance.

Cassandra is open-source and free to use. However, running Cassandra at scale requires significant infrastructure, which can drive up operational costs. Third-party vendors like DataStax provide Cassandra as a managed service, but these come at a price.

ClickHouse vs Cassandra – Architecture

Let’s start by comparing the architecture and design of the two data stores.

ClickHouse Cassandra

Here are the architectural highlights of ClickHouse:

  • Columnar storage in ClickHouse improves query speed for analytical workloads since it only reads the required columns instead of scanning entire rows.
  • It uses advanced compression algorithms (e.g., LZ4, ZSTD) to minimize storage requirements and enhance query speed.
  • ClickHouse follows an append-only approach, meaning data is mostly immutable. Instead of updating existing records, it inserts new data and later merges it in the background.
  • ClickHouse uses a shared-nothing architecture, where each node operates independently. Data can be distributed across nodes using sharding, but this requires manual configuration and the use of ClickHouse Keeper.
  • Supports asynchronous replication for fault tolerance, but replication is not as seamless or automatic as in Cassandra.

Here are the key architectural aspects of Cassandra:

  • Cassandra uses a row-oriented storage model with dynamic columns, organized into partitions. Each partition can store a large number of rows.
  • Data is stored in immutable Sorted String Tables (SSTables) on disk, which are periodically compacted to optimize read performance.
  • Unlike ClickHouse, Cassandra supports frequent updates and deletes.
  • Cassandra is built for distributed environments from the ground up. It uses a peer-to-peer architecture with no single point of failure.
  • Data is automatically partitioned across nodes using a consistent hashing mechanism. Replication is configurable, with support for multi-datacenter replication out of the box.

ClickHouse vs Cassandra – Performance

Performance can be a key deciding factor when evaluating databases. Let’s talk about the query execution speed, workload suitability, and overall efficiency of ClickHouse and Cassandra in this section.

ClickHouse Cassandra

Here’s how ClickHouse performs:

  • Optimized for fast reads due to its columnar storage, which allows it to scan only the required columns instead of full rows.
  • Uses vectorized query execution, in which data is processed in batches for better CPU efficiency and faster analytics.
  • Supports complex queries like joins, aggregations, and filtering. This makes it a strong choice for analytical workloads.
  • Batch inserts work well, but frequent updates and deletes are slow due to its append-only storage model.
  • Consumes more CPU and RAM for real-time queries, but compression helps reduce storage overhead.
  • Scales horizontally, but requires manual sharding and replication setup for distributed workloads.

Here are some performance-related aspects of Cassandra:

  • Optimized for high write throughput with its log-structured storage. This makes it ideal for workloads that need fast data ingestion.
  • Updates and deletes are fast, unlike ClickHouse, because it’s built to handle frequent data modifications.
  • Uses automatic sharding and replication to ensure high availability and fault tolerance without manual setup.
  • Scales seamlessly in distributed environments, which makes it a great choice for high-traffic applications.
  • Read performance can degrade over time due to compaction and tombstones, especially if not properly tuned.

ClickHouse vs Cassandra – Maintenance and operations

Every administrator knows that database management isn’t just about performance – it also involves day-to-day operations like replication, scaling, backups, bottleneck identification, and general upkeep. This section compares ClickHouse and Cassandra in terms of ease of maintenance and operational complexity.

ClickHouse Cassandra

Here’s what you need to know about maintaining and operating ClickHouse:

  • As touched on above, ClickHouse requires manual configuration for sharding and replication, unlike Cassandra, which automates this. It uses ClickHouse Keeper to manage distributed setups, which can have a steep learning curve for some.
  • Replication in ClickHouse is asynchronous, meaning there is a chance of data lag between nodes. While this works well for analytical workloads, it’s less suitable for scenarios that need real-time consistency.
  • Since ClickHouse enforces a strict schema, modifications like adding or removing columns can be expensive and complicated operations.
  • ClickHouse supports incremental backups to local disks or S3 buckets, but setting up a backup routine requires extensive configuration. You can also use third-party tools like clickhouse-backup to automate the entire process.
  • ClickHouse provides internal system tables for monitoring queries, performance, and storage usage. However, logging and debugging can be complex, especially in a distributed setup.
  • Since ClickHouse follows an append-only storage model, updates and deletes require background merging processes. Over time, storage use can grow significantly if not managed properly.

Here’s what you need to know about maintaining and operating Cassandra:

  • Cassandra automates data distribution and replication across nodes, which makes it easier to scale than ClickHouse. The consistent hashing mechanism guarantees even load distribution.
  • Cassandra is schema-optional. This allows developers to dynamically create columns without strict constraints.
  • Cassandra supports asynchronous replication across nodes, which helps with high availability and fault tolerance. However, because replication happens in the background, there may be temporary inconsistencies between nodes, which leads to eventual consistency rather than strong consistency.
  • Since Cassandra frequently updates and deletes data, it relies on compaction processes to clean up old records. However, improper tuning can lead to performance bottlenecks.
  • Cassandra provides built-in snapshot-based backups, making it easier to restore data when needed. Many managed Cassandra services also offer automated backup solutions.
  • Cassandra comes with built-in monitoring tools like nodetool, which provides insights into node health, latency, and storage usage. For example, the assassinate command in nodetool removes a node from the cluster without triggering any re-replication.
  • Cassandra scales horizontally with minimal effort. Adding new nodes is straightforward, and the system automatically redistributes data without requiring manual intervention.

ClickHouse vs Cassandra – Availability

Next, let’s compare ClickHouse and Cassandra in the availability department.

ClickHouse Cassandra

Key availability aspects of ClickHouse include:

  • Asynchronous replication means there can be delays in data consistency across nodes, which can affect availability in real-time applications.
  • Single-node failures can impact performance, especially in sharded setups where queries depend on multiple nodes.
  • Can handle read-heavy workloads well, but ensuring high availability requires a well-configured distributed cluster with replicas.
  • ClickHouse can automatically recover from small data differences, but if discrepancies are too large (e.g., due to misconfiguration), manual intervention is required.

Key availability aspects of Cassandra include:

  • Similar to ClickHouse, Cassandra’s asynchronous replication can lead to data consistency issues in real-time applications.
  • Cassandra's decentralized, masterless architecture is designed for continuous availability. Its ring-based topology and configurable replication factors ensure that data remains accessible even in the event of node failures.
  • Automatic failover ensures that if a node goes down, another replica can handle requests without manual intervention.
  • Multi-datacenter replication allows for disaster recovery and global availability, making it ideal for mission-critical applications.
  • Tunable consistency lets users balance between availability and consistency based on their needs.

ClickHouse vs. Cassandra – Security

Security is a crucial aspect when choosing a database, especially if you have to store sensitive data. Let’s compare how ClickHouse and Cassandra fare in this department.

ClickHouse Cassandra

ClickHouse is generally considered a secure database. Here are some highlights:

  • ClickHouse supports basic password-based authentication for users. The cloud variant supports other options like SSO and multi-factor authentication. It’s also possible to integrate it with external authentication systems (e.g., LDAP).
  • ClickHouse supports RBAC-based access management, allowing permissions to be assigned to users, roles, row policies, settings profiles, and quotas.
  • It supports SSL/TLS encryption for secure communication between clients and servers.
  • ClickHouse provides built-in functions for encrypting and decrypting data using AES (Advanced Encryption Standard). It’s worth noting that these encryption functions were slow in versions before ClickHouse 21.1.
  • ClickHouse provides logging for query execution and user activity, but advanced auditing features are limited.
  • Integration with external logging and monitoring tools (like the ClickHouse monitoring solution by Site24x7) is necessary for comprehensive auditing.
  • Firewall rules and network isolation are recommended in order to restrict access to ClickHouse servers.
  • ClickHouse Cloud offers enhanced network security features, including VPC peering and private endpoints.

Cassandra is secure by design. Here are some of its key security-related aspects:

  • Cassandra supports password-based authentication and can integrate with external authentication systems like LDAP and Kerberos via plugins.
  • Cassandra supports SSL/TLS encryption for client-to-node and node-to-node communication. However, Apache Cassandra (open-source) does not include transparent data encryption (TDE) for data at rest. TDE is available as a paid feature in DataStax Enterprise.
  • Cassandra provides robust role-based access control (RBAC) with granular permissions for users and roles. Permissions can be defined at the keyspace, table, and row levels, offering fine-grained security.
  • Cassandra includes auditing capabilities to track user activity, such as login attempts and data access. Audit logs can be integrated with external monitoring and SIEM (Security Information and Event Management) tools.
  • Cassandra supports IP-based access control lists (ACLs) to restrict access to specific nodes or clients.
  • Network encryption and firewalls are recommended to secure communication between nodes and clients.

Regardless of whether you're using ClickHouse or Cassandra, it’s important to mention here that database security depends heavily on proper configuration and maintenance. Here are some key best practices you should follow:

  • Enforce strong passwords and, if possible, use multi-factor authentication (MFA).
  • Implement RBAC (Role-Based Access Control) to restrict user permissions to only what's necessary.
  • Enable SSL/TLS encryption to secure communication between clients and database servers.
  • Encrypt sensitive data at rest, using built-in encryption features or custom implementations if needed. For example, if you are using the open-source version of Cassandra, you can implement a custom encryption solution to handle at-rest encryption for your sensitive data.
  • Enable query logging and auditing to track access and modifications to the database.
  • Use VPC peering, private endpoints, or VPNs for internal database access instead of exposing it to the public internet.
  • Regularly apply security patches and updates to the database and underlying OS. Stay tuned to the official mailing lists, security advisories, and community forums of ClickHouse and Cassandra to stay informed about vulnerabilities and patches.
  • Test disaster recovery procedures to ensure you can restore data in case of an attack or failure.

Pros and cons of each – when to use which?

By this point, you already know that both Cassandra and ClickHouse have their strengths and weaknesses. Let’s list them all down below to help you decide which one suits your needs better.

ClickHouse

Pros Cons
  • Columnar storage and optimized indexing make ClickHouse great for analytical workloads.
  • Advanced compression algorithms reduce storage costs and speed up query execution.
  • Can handle large data sets efficiently with distributed query execution.
  • Supports RBAC, SSL/TLS encryption, encryption at rest, and authentication integrations.
  • If self-hosted, ClickHouse is open-source and cost-effective compared to traditional data warehouses.
  • Append-only nature makes it inefficient for frequent updates and deletes.
  • Distributed setup and data partitioning require manual configuration.
  • Asynchronous replication can lead to temporary data inconsistencies.
  • While the open-source version is free, the managed cloud version comes with a price tag.

Cassandra

Pros Cons
  • Built for distributed environments with no single point of failure.
  • Designed for write-heavy applications with fast insert speeds.
  • Multi-datacenter and fault-tolerant replication without manual intervention.
  • Easily scales horizontally by adding new nodes.
  • Supports SSL/TLS encryption, RBAC, and integration with external authentication systems.
  • Row-based storage makes it less efficient for analytical queries.
  • Data duplication from replication increases storage costs.
  • Requires proper tuning to achieve optimal performance.
  • Transparent Data Encryption (TDE) is only available in the paid DataStax Enterprise version.

Still confused? Here’s a checklist to help you finalize:

Go with ClickHouse if Go with Cassandra if
  • You need fast, complex analytical queries with aggregations.
  • Your workload is mostly read-heavy (i.e., business intelligence, dashboards, real-time analytics).
  • You want efficient compression to reduce storage costs.
  • You are okay with data immutability (i.e., minimal updates/deletes).
  • You have the expertise to handle manual sharding and data distribution.
  • You need a highly available and fault-tolerant database.
  • Your application is write-heavy – i.e., it requires fast inserts and updates.
  • You need seamless horizontal scalability and automatic replication.
  • You are okay with an eventual consistency model over strong consistency.
  • You don’t need native encryption at rest (or can use DataStax Enterprise for TDE).

Conclusion

ClickHouse and Cassandra are both reliable, performant, and feature-rich databases that support powerful business use cases across industries. We hope that you can use the insights shared in this guide to make an informed decision between the two, based on your organization’s specific needs.

Regardless of which solution you go with, make sure to set up a dedicated monitoring solution to track instance health in real time. Site24x7 offers tools for both ClickHouse and Cassandra.

Was this article helpful?

Related Articles