3 ms·
Understood. Different use cases. We like schema, gives us an opportunity to keep data in check. We also communicate through protobuf so there is no benefit in s
by doh 9y ago
Understood. Different use cases. We like schema, gives us an opportunity to keep data in check. We also communicate through protobuf so there is no benefit in schema-free database for us.
I know that Heap Analytics is using jsonb to have schema-free setup on citus and I think it's working well for them.
- barrkel 9y agoThat's the second time you've thought I was talking about schema free. Column stores have nothing to do with schema free. Completely orthogonal. Column-oriented stores normally have just as much schema as row-oriented stores. What they're faster at is scans where the full row tuple is not required to compute the result. Storing the data in columnar format rather than row also means much better compression: similar data is brought closer together.
- doh 9y agoYou're correct, I misunderstood you. Column stores are great, for some tasks and have disadvantages in others. Redshift was I believe the first implementation at top of PG so it's doable, however not sure that PG itself is a good engine for it. In our case, where we need to have access to multiple columns at once, column stores (including the ones that clump them as families/groups) proved to be slower and required more resources than the row-oriented stores. I think this really goes case by case based on your needs. If we would benefit from column-oriented DB we would not chose PG/Citus but something else (probably would stay still on Hbase).