3 ms·
Unless this means "sure, the result was already cached in memory" I don't see how you can be 10000x faster than Clickhouse. This claim is too big.
by pachico 6y ago
Unless this means "sure, the result was already cached in memory" I don't see how you can be 10000x faster than Clickhouse.
This claim is too big.
- zX41ZdbW 6y agoActually in their example, no data is processed. The query compiled to a loop over natural numbers that was optimized by the compiler: uint64_t x = 0; for (uint64_t i = 0; i < 1000000000000; ++i) x += i; print x; This loop is completely eliminated by compiler optimizations. But it does not make much sense to run these queries in SQL :)