5 ms·
They did the mongodb approach. Build a shitty db and then build a normal one and claim 100X faster. And then add synchronized disk commits (like postgresql has
by ddorian43 11y ago
They did the mongodb approach. Build a shitty db and then build a normal one and claim 100X faster.
And then add synchronized disk commits (like postgresql has always done) and performance goes puff (meaning lower than pg) (example: elasticsearch, mongodb).
- pauldix 11y agofsyncs happen on every write. They're durable. This release may be 100x faster than our previous release, but it's also a competitor with other solutions. We haven't run any comparisons vs. other solutions, but we will do that soon and I expect that we'll be competitive and better in some cases.
- CyrusL 11y agoVery tasteful way to handle the parent comment :) Does Todd Persen talk about durability testing in the video or is more about performance benchmarking? I haven't watched yet. https://vimeo.com/153802549 https://vimeo.com/153802549
- pauldix 11y agoThanks :). He talks about doing kill nines on the process while doing a bunch of writes, trying to corrupt the DB, and perf testing. In addition to a little bit of talk about what came before and some lessons learned.
- SEJeff 11y agoHave you had a chance to throw Influx through the paces of Kyle Kingsbury's Jepsen distributed data store tester?
- pauldix 11y agoNot yet, but it's on our TODO list. However, we have to finish the clustering implementation before we bother going through that testing. At this point we're telling people it's experimental and not meant for production use.
- fapjacks 11y agoThis is not the first time I have seen an anti-InfluxDB post that also subtly pushes PostgreSQL in its place. Now I totally agree and I am not happy with InfluxDB's performance, and maybe I'm just being paranoid, but it's interesting I've seen this a handful of times.
- flowless 11y agoI would like to see actual comparison of both. I'm going pg way myself but due to millisecond precision of timestamps required for handling scientific data.
- pauldix 11y agoHave a look at this release. The write performance is massively better than it was. We did tests writing up to 100B points against a single server. The next release will focus on improving query performance, but this one still works for many cases.
- cbsmith 11y agoMassive performance improvements like that tend to come down to overall changes in the data structure and/or algorithm. This is like, "oh yeah, maybe we should do LSM?" or "maybe compressed bitmaps?" kind of stuff. What what the magic?