4 ms·
Hey, OctoSQL[0] author here. This is an updated benchmark originally posted a week ago[1] and is a bit of an update to the assertion made at that time. It now
by cube2222 5y ago
Hey, OctoSQL[0] author here.
This is an updated benchmark originally posted a week ago[1] and is a bit of an update to the assertion made at that time.
It now includes clickhouse-local, which is very very fast, as well as a new release of OctoSQL where I tackled some low hanging fruits to get a huge boost in performance (happy to expand in case somebody's interested). Both resulted in substantial changes to the overall picture painted by the benchmarks.
[0]:https://github.com/cube2222/octosql https://github.com/cube2222/octosql
[1]:https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31004563 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31004563
- qoega 5y agoInteresting! As ClickHouse is not the fastest in this scenario, we can improve it! Probably initialisation of clickhouse-local process takes more time than jq.