3 ms·
Please see below for correction... but at some point today a poster said "~2 weeks" for Timestream... but that's incorrect. We ran the data load/ingest for "~2
by ryanbooz 6y ago
Please see below for correction... but at some point today a poster said "~2 weeks" for Timestream... but that's incorrect. We ran the data load/ingest for "~2 days" (40 hours).
Just want to make sure the right numbers are being used! Thanks!
(Post author @Timescale)
- overcast 6y agoSTILL! 5 minutes vs 2 DAYS can't be attributed to just being replicated.
- rubiquity 6y agoLarge numbers are unintuitive. If we’re conservative and add only 1 millisecond of latency for the 3 AZ replication, on 410 million records that is about 4 and a half days of time if the client is not doing any batching.
- ryanbooz 6y agoTSBS did batch 100 metrics at a time, the max per request that Timestream allows. As we (and others) have suggested, this could easily be one of the reasons it's harder to ingest more quickly without significantly more threads. TimescaleDB (and other TSDB's) allow much higher batching values.