4 ms·
This question isn't that bad, so why the downvotes? I'd like to see a comparison between Julia's performance on an in memory dataframe against the same data in
by Bootvis 13y ago
This question isn't that bad, so why the downvotes? I'd like to see a comparison between Julia's performance on an in memory dataframe against the same data in an SQL table. Julia should have the advantage but how fast is it really?
- tfigment 13y agoI wasn't voting but to me they are orthogonal questions unless you frame it in specific way. Also to me that is not what the article was about. It was about defining immutable structures. Julia is a client language and data must be local/in-memory to manipulate which SQL is generally has more going on and is usually being interacted with remotely. Julia might be faster than Sqlite3 but I sort of doubt it for an in-process manipulation where sql can do the work. Julia has an advantage that you can probably do more operations than what sql typically allows for. I frequently hand code SQL to do complex aggregates in it so that the server can do the calculation fast and only send the result and I don't have to pull the whole data set to work on it. When Julia is client/server and I can write remote functions to aggregate data on the server and then return the result then this question can be asked again I think.