Apache CassandravsPulse
Two self-hosted projects, compared on the numbers selfhost.directory tracks live: score, popularity, release cadence and setup effort.
| Apache Cassandra | Pulse | |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 74/100 | 71/100 |
| Rank in category | #8 of 38 in Databases | #2 of 19 in Infrastructure Monitoring |
| GitHub stars | 10 126 | 6 973 |
| Stars, last 30 days | +24 | +232 |
| Stable releases, 12 months | 0 | 43 |
| Latest release | — | helm-chart-6.6.0 · 25 Oct 2026 |
| Setup | Advanced | Easy |
| Official Docker image | Yes | Yes |
| License | Apache-2.0 | MIT |
| Main language | Java | Go |
Which one should you pick?
Apache Cassandra scores 74/100 against 71/100 for Pulse, so it is the safer default.
Pulse ships more often: 43 stable releases in the past year, against 0 for Apache Cassandra.
If you want the quickest setup, Pulse is easier to run; Apache Cassandra needs more configuration.
Pulse is growing faster right now (+232 stars in 30 days).
Apache Cassandra details →Pulse details →