13 ms·

Thanks, I agree batching inserts would indeed be a good idea and it makes sense that's recommended. However that link you mention (as of now) does not specify w

Thanks, I agree batching inserts would indeed be a good idea and it makes sense that's recommended. However that link you mention (as of now) does not specify what a write unit is. So if that could be clarified, that would be great. Since from your reply it sounds like one INSERT would indeed (at a minimum) incur one write unit. And thus 100 writes could indeed cost $1.25. Which could get expensive, fast.

tbragin 4y ago
An INSERT can consume less than one write unit, depending on how many rows and bytes it writes to how many partitions, columns, materialized views, data types, etc. So, a "write unit", which corresponds to hundreds of low-level write operations, typically translates to many batched INSERTS. We are working to improve our examples in the FAQ to clarify - thank you so much for asking the question!
- ok_dad 4y ago
  You know what would be really helpful? Some tooling around measuring "write units", like a fake local ClickHouseCloud API you could submit a write to and see how many "write units" that particular write would take. Of course, that would make pricing transparent and easy and SaaS companies don't seem like that. I challenge you folks to actually figure out a way to prevent surprise bills, until then all this "write unit" stuff is bullshit.
- mike_d 4y ago
  > We are working to improve our examples in the FAQ to clarify Based on the comments here, and my own confusion, I think figuring out a different way of billing read/write operations is in order.