Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

New in PostgreSQL 10

wiki.postgresql.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 258 posts

Re: New in PostgreSQL 10

#31

Post by wjossey »

noncoml wrote: post #10
davedx wrote: post #4

How does PostgreSQL 10 compare with Cassandra for BigData requirements?

By no means an expert, but isn’t it Apples and Oranges? Cassandra is an eventual consistent database. Postgres is ACID. My 2c: you don’t need Cassandra or other BigData databases. If you did, you probably wouldn’t ask the question.

Having provisioned these sorts of "big data" systems in the past, it's now about how much you have today, it's how much you'll have over a growth period. The advantages of a scale-out system like cassandra, riak (RIP), memsql, big-table, cockroach, etc., are that they can grow with you from 3TB, to 9TB, to 81TB (as an example, if you're on some exponential growth curve with your data). It's not that you can't do it with Postgres and MySQL via sharding, it's that you don't have to if your access patterns match one of the models that one of the above databases fits well within.

So, that person above may not need it today, but they may need it sooner rather than later.

Re: New in PostgreSQL 10

#32

Post by Chickenosaurus »

snissn wrote: post #17
davedx wrote: post #4

How does PostgreSQL 10 compare with Cassandra for BigData requirements?

Does Cassandra allow aggregate functions like sum() or avg() yet?

Yes, Cassandra supports common aggregation functions as well as user-defined aggregators which have to be created in Java.

Re: New in PostgreSQL 10

#33

Post by okaram »

pulam wrote: post #21
SEJeff wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Define "big data"? You can buy normal tier 1 server vendor hardware with 6T of memory. If it fits into 1 machine or a few, it isn't "big data".

I've heard this 6TB number thrown around a bit recently, but no one can actually provide me with links to hardware I can buy - has anyone successfully setup a machine with this much ram who can post links to what they used?

Don't know about hardware you can buy, but AWS will rent you a machine with 3TB Ram by the hour :) https://aws.amazon.com/ec2/instance-types/

Re: New in PostgreSQL 10

#34

Post by IMTDb »

PgSQL more and more looks like the "redis of databases". Whatever the problem, you can almost always find a good reason to use it :)

You get great performance for the simple "dumb" use case (relational data in DB term, key/value store in redis case), and lots of awesome additional feature on top of it for more complex situations.

I love it.

Re: New in PostgreSQL 10

#35

Post by gshulegaard »

wjossey wrote: post #31
noncoml wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

By no means an expert, but isn’t it Apples and Oranges? Cassandra is an eventual consistent database. Postgres is ACID. My 2c: you don’t need Cassandra or other BigData databases. If you did, you probably wouldn’t ask the question.

Having provisioned these sorts of "big data" systems in the past, it's now about how much you have today, it's how much you'll have over a growth period. The advantages of a scale-out system like cassandra, riak (RIP), memsql, big-table, cockroach, etc., are that they can grow with you from 3TB, to 9TB, to 81TB (as an example, if you're on some exponential growth curve with your data). It's not that you can't do it w…

This is a really insightful comment. It's not that you can't get Postgres to handle any volume...it's how much work is required on your part.

Re: New in PostgreSQL 10

#36

Post by super_mario »

snissn wrote: post #17
davedx wrote: post #4

How does PostgreSQL 10 compare with Cassandra for BigData requirements?

Does Cassandra allow aggregate functions like sum() or avg() yet?

Yes in newest versions it does. But for any non-trivial analytics you would use Apache Spark (most likely Spark/SQL).

Cassandra's CQL is very limited in terms of types of queries it supports.

Re: New in PostgreSQL 10

#37

Post by jorgeleo »

alceta wrote: post #19

If anyone even remotely involved with the maintenance and development of pg reads this thread - Thank you! - for all your efforts in building and improving a first class product that keeps me amazed at the strides it takes with each major. release.

Third!

Re: New in PostgreSQL 10

#39

Post by pbnjay »

> Cross-column Statistics

Holy crap I didn't even know this was feasible much less in development! Can't wait to test this out, as significant amount of my data sets have these kinds of relationships.

Parallel query will also be great for certain queries I do regularly. Been looking forward to this!

Thank you Thank you to all the devs that had a part of this!

Re: New in PostgreSQL 10

#40

Post by noncoml »

wjossey wrote: post #31
noncoml wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

By no means an expert, but isn’t it Apples and Oranges? Cassandra is an eventual consistent database. Postgres is ACID. My 2c: you don’t need Cassandra or other BigData databases. If you did, you probably wouldn’t ask the question.

Having provisioned these sorts of "big data" systems in the past, it's now about how much you have today, it's how much you'll have over a growth period. The advantages of a scale-out system like cassandra, riak (RIP), memsql, big-table, cockroach, etc., are that they can grow with you from 3TB, to 9TB, to 81TB (as an example, if you're on some exponential growth curve with your data). It's not that you can't do it w…

Designing for the future is a guaranteed project failure.

If one is starting a new project, hence contemplating what DB to use, starting with an ACID db is a safe bet in most cases(unless of course they are already starting with a huge amount of data).

By the time the outgrow the ACID database they will have a better idea of what exactly they need and more importantly they will have the resources to make the switch.

BTW: riak is hopefully not dead yet, let's see what bet365 can do with it..

Post reply on HN