4 ms·
Nope, not on par. While there is no direct comparison to InfluxDB in the article, look at the disk usage and (more importantly) disk I/O utilization, which is
by will-not-smith 9y ago
Nope, not on par.
While there is no direct comparison to InfluxDB in the article, look at the disk usage and (more importantly) disk I/O utilization, which is indistinguishable from zero on the graph, whereas before it was at 20-30% with the same load.
So not on par. Much, much better.
(Of course, Prometheus and InfluxDB are not perfect substitutes for one another, so there's much more to look at than just storage engine performance.)
- bbrazil 9y agoThe third version of the InfluxDB database is basically the same core design as Prometheus's third database version which 2.0 uses. I'd expect performance to be broadly similar, maybe a little better with Prometheus as we can take advantage of the characteristics of our domain. We do have a comparison to Influx on our website: https://prometheus.io/docs/introduction/comparison/#prometheus-vs.-influxdb https://prometheus.io/docs/introduction/comparison/#promethe... Which is the right choice really depends on the use case. If you're doing metrics-based operational monitoring, Prometheus is generally best. Disclaimer: Prometheus developer.
- SuperQue 9y agoWe just upgraded one of GitLab's Prometheus servers (we have HA redundant servers). We saw a better than 10x reduction in CPU use. https://imgur.com/3aJtYu9 https://imgur.com/3aJtYu9 This server doesn't take any query load, but it does take the same ingestion load as the others. (The long down time in the middle is waiting for rm -rf on the old data dir.)