Hm. I'm looking at this and "6 billion in 4 seconds" seems misleading - the test that appears to be referring to is "Query 6", which (a) only examines records f

Hm. I'm looking at this and "6 billion in 4 seconds" seems misleading - the test that appears to be referring to is "Query 6", which (a) only examines records from 1994 (b) on a table with entries sorted by timestamp, such that (c) only the portions of the data which fall in the correct timerange are actually sent for processing. In other words, it's not actually really looking at a full 6 billion records for that query. More accurate would be the next query discussed, "Query 1", which takes 72 seconds to look over a much more significant portion of that 6 billion records. It's still a pretty impressive set of numbers (as one would expect from GPU SIMD processing), but it irks me when short descriptions bend the facts to try to sound more significant. (Not to mention anything about the disk time subtraction.)