4 ms·
> Recently, the most interesting rift in the Postgres vs OLAP space is [Hydra](https://www.hydra.so https://www.hydra.so), an open-source, column-oriented distr
by mritchie712 3y ago
> Recently, the most interesting rift in the Postgres vs OLAP space is [Hydra](https://www.hydra.so https://www.hydra.so), an open-source, column-oriented distribution of Postgres that was very recently launched (after our migration to ClickHouse). Had Hydra been available during our decision-making time period, we might’ve made a different choice.
There will likely be a good OLAP solution (possibly implemented as an extension) in Postgres in the next year or so. There are a few companies are working on it (Hydra, Parade[0], tembo etc.).
0 - https://www.paradedb.com/ https://www.paradedb.com/
- riku_iki 3y ago> 0 - https://www.paradedb.com/ https://www.paradedb.com/ this looks like repackaging of datafusion as PG extension?..
- mritchie712 3y agoyes, that's a succinct way to put it.
- snihalani 3y agoHave you seen: https://benchmark.clickhouse.com/ https://benchmark.clickhouse.com/
- iimblack 3y agoThat’s cool. Clickhouse and Alloy’s performances are impressive.
- riku_iki 3y agothat benchmark is very weak, they used just 100M rows which is laughable, also no joins have been tested.
- mritchie712 3y agono joins is heavily favoring clickhouse (the creator of the benchmark). I'm not sure it's gotten better since I've seriously looked at them, but CH's join performance was really bad.
- philippemnoel 3y agoParadeDB founder here. You can see how we compare to other Postgres-based analytical offerings on ClickBench here: https://blog.paradedb.com/pages/introducing_analytics https://blog.paradedb.com/pages/introducing_analytics
- riku_iki 3y ago[flagged]
- philippemnoel 3y agoI did not know that... That's very disingenuous! We'll make sure to keep this in mind as we make our own comparisons. We haven't tuned ParadeDB at all in our published ClickBench benchmarks, so it should be more representative
- wuputah 3y agoThat is an incorrect and baseless accusation, we had nothing to do with "Postgres (tuned)". My commits are only in the `hydra` folder. There are no restrictions on how you set up the benchmark in Clickbench and the settings we use there are analogous with what we use on our cloud service for a similar sized instance. As the linked post points out, the main 'advantage' of the "tuned" benchmark is the indexes, which are tuned specifically to the queries in the benchmark. We do not use indexes in our version of the benchmark, aside from the primary key (which actually provides no performance advantage).
- riku_iki 3y agoI apologize for falsely claiming that it was Hydra devs who committed Postgres config. However, I think problem stands: it is your main marketing pitch to compare HydraDB to undertuned PG, it is right on landing page of your project. > the main 'advantage' of the "tuned" benchmark is the indexes I am not sure which post you referred to, but unless you or someone else analyzed execution plans for all PG queries in that benchmark and verified that indexes are actually used, it is just speculations without evidence. Another issue with this comparison is that ClickBench is toy micro-benchmark with just 100M records. Increasing datasize may or may not be beneficial for HydraDB.
- Mortiffer 3y agoso Paradedb and Hydra are using same codebase or just similar approach ?
- philippemnoel 3y agoParadeDB and Hydra are completely different. We're tackling the same problem of bringing analytics inside Postgres, but using different approaches. ParadeDB integrates industry standards like Arrow, Parquet, DataFusion to offer columnar storage + vectorized processing. Hydra is building on top of Citus Columnar. You can read about our approach here: https://blog.paradedb.com/pages/introducing_analytics https://blog.paradedb.com/pages/introducing_analytics
- ddorian43 3y agoI don't think `tembo` is working on it though, probably just hosting an existing extension.