In the former study, if you read it carefully, Aerospike were essentially able to choose the hardware for the test.

"Anyway, the code is free to install, it's easy enough to validate the speed claims"

So why don't you do so and come back with your own results that can at least pretend to be neutral instead of spreading empty hype around here?

/me aerospike employee here - we did a live demo of running aerospike server on AWS EC2 during the fifth elephant last weekend at bangalore. The demo had 1M TPS and latency for 80/20 load (80% read, 20% write) was <1ms for >99.8% of queries.

This demo was done on 4 r3.4xlarge nodes - We did earlier runs on r3.2xl as well with similar results.

https://twitter.com/anshprat/status/492971667493122048

I didnt do a latency screenshot grab but those who saw the demo can comment..

"So why don't you do so and come back with your own results that can at least pretend to be neutral instead of spreading empty hype around here?"

I don't own a computer, unless you count the smartphone I carry in my pocket. I somewhat suspect I'm in the minority on this on a site like HN.

I see Aerospike being the fastest but nothing is mentioned anywhere about error rate or reliability.

Also that test is interesting in that it favours Aerospike's use case i.e. when you have enough data to comfortably fit on SSDs. Somewhat unfair given that the majority of people using Cassandra would be doing so with large data sets.