3 ms·
I'm sure many folks would be really interested to see two things: 1. A blog post around a reproducible benchmark between QuestDB, TimescaleDB, and InfluxDB 2.
by shay_ker 6y ago
I'm sure many folks would be really interested to see two things:
1. A blog post around a reproducible benchmark between QuestDB, TimescaleDB, and InfluxDB
2. A page, like questdb.io/quest-vs-timescale, that details the differences in side-by-side feature comparisons, kind of like this page: https://www.scylladb.com/lp/scylla-vs-cassandra/ https://www.scylladb.com/lp/scylla-vs-cassandra/. Understandably, in the early days, this page will update frequently, but that level of transparency is really helpful to build trust with your users. Additionally, it'll help your less technical users to understand the differences, and it will be a sharable link for people to convince others & management that QuestDB is a good investment.
- avthar 6y agoPerhaps the QuestDB team could add it to the Time Series Benchmarking Suite [1]? It currently supports benchmarking 9 databases including TimescaleDB and InfluxDB. [1] https://github.com/timescale/tsbs https://github.com/timescale/tsbs
- sirffuzzylogik 6y agoThis is a great idea, we will have a look! It is good to see that the ecosystem is moving towards a normalized / "standard" benchmarking tool.
- PeterCorless 6y agoLove it! And agree. Hopefully this has the same broad effects the same way YCSB benchmark or Jepsen testing really helped level the playing field.
- PeterCorless 6y agoWow! Nice. I am surprised neither Scylla nor KairosDB are on that list. I think you could run Scylla by itself (to compare with raw Cassandra) and also re-run with KairosDB running on top of Scylla and Cassandra to see what effects that has on performance. (Though of course, there are advantages to having KairosDB, too.)