All relational columnstores use batch inserts and updates. In fact that's the recommended way to write columnstore data and SQL already supports various batch i

All relational columnstores use batch inserts and updates. In fact that's the recommended way to write columnstore data and SQL already supports various batch insert methods. The modern databases also use a row-store representation as a buffer for any single-row mutations before merging the columnstore segments. [1] OpenTSDB compacts columns inside a column-family. This is because Hbase/cassandra/dynamo key/value stores support arbitrary columns for each row and store a verbose identifier for the column/cell/version matrix. It's a custom data format to save disk space but the underlying compaction still refers to HBase LSM-tree compaction. [2] The rows are still stored individually and compression is enabled on HDFS. But yes, it's all highly dependent on the situation and it's the same fundamental mechanics of batching and compressing data. My point is that it's better to just use a database that is built with this architecture and can provide greater performance, usability and full querying flexibility instead of bolting it on top of a less functional data store. 1. https://docs.memsql.com/v7.1/concepts/columnstore/ https://docs.memsql.com/v7.1/concepts/columnstore/ 2. http://opentsdb.net/docs/build/html/user_guide/definitions.html http://opentsdb.net/docs/build/html/user_guide/definitions.h...