5 ms·
PostgreSQL vs. Impala
A standoff between PostgreSQL and Impala for OLAP operations
- milliams 13y agoA graph with no units on the y-axis (and not even stated clearly in the text) put me completely off reading this article.
- dagilmore 13y agoI thought it was safe to assume that seconds were the unit of choice, but next time i'll be more clear. Thanks for the suggestion
- lazyjones 13y agoI'd like to see the code / data so I can try to reproduce these results. If it took them 6 hours to load 25m rows / 10GB with PostgreSQL, they must have screwed it up (deliberately?).
- copergi 13y agoBenchmarks where we're not given the data, code, scripts, etc to reproduce them are not useful.
- dagilmore 13y agoIf you look in the citations, you'll see everything you need to reproduce the results!
- ecolak 13y agoImpala, imitating Google's Dremel, is specifically designed for OLAP scenarios with its columnar storage structure and the compression algorithms that go along with it. This is not a fair comparison. Try doing OLTP with Impala and you'll see what I mean.
- dagilmore 13y agoGreat point! I mentioned it in the post, did you read it? "Note that the properties of a relational database are well suited to online-transaction processing (OLTP). Such a system guarantees consistency and availability, and it supports extreme multi-tenancy. However, complex logic over large amounts of data does not perform well"