5 ms·
given snowflake also uses s3. Could aws do something with redshift that moves computation closer to s3 and be even faster than snowflake. Basically take advanta
by dominotw 5y ago
given snowflake also uses s3. Could aws do something with redshift that moves computation closer to s3 and be even faster than snowflake. Basically take advantage of the fact that they own s3.
- dalyons 5y agothey already have https://aws.amazon.com/redshift/features/aqua/ https://aws.amazon.com/redshift/features/aqua/ basically distributing compute down to the actual storage nodes
- orf 5y agoYeah that’s cool except it made all our queries slower. I’ll add that to my list above, forgot about that.
- MaxGanzII 5y agoI've not yet investigated AQUA, but it's absolutely on the list. The idea that is handles some SQL functionality with additional parallelism seems fine, but then I read that if a query uses any AQUA functionality, it's something like the entire query runs in AQUA, and that seems to me to be potentially a problem. I'm very curious to start investigating, but there's a list of higher priority matters to investigate.