4 ms·

Would you choose to run with druid again?

• sologoub 10y ago
  For that use case, absolutely! We made do with the version that could not even support label appends (limited joins). The current version would allow us a lot fewer workarounds. The probabilistic hyperloglog data type is also a game changer compared to say redshift, but again it's only viable if you are dealing with counting (estimating) unique entities across billions of rows and super-wide dimension sets. If you are doing a general purpose analytics store, Redshift is hard to beat because of reliability and ease of implementation. Druid is a purpose-built race car. Redshift is a good cross-over - far less headache and can do almost any job good enough, but you won't have the tuning or performance (when tuned right) at scale. Although, I'm continuously impressed with what redshift actually can do, dispite the humble feature set. Druid's main weakness is lack of SQL support, so it's not a great analyst datastore. You pretty much have to wrap it into a reporting app.
  • otterley 10y ago
    What do you think of ClickHouse vis-a-vis Druid and Redshift?
    • sologoub 10y ago
      Don't have any experience with that tech, but from reading the marketing landing page it sounds more akin to memSQL than Redshift, in that it seems to include options for streaming ingestion. If I'm going to take on a similar project, I may POC memSQL or Citus DB, and possibly Big Query (if the project is built on Google Cloud as opposed to AWS or raw iron).
  • scapecast 10y ago
    Hi sologoub - can you elaborate a bit on the tuning for Redshift you're referring to? What's the pain there? Asking because we're building a performance management product for Redshift, I'd love your input! lars at intermix dot io