No, QuestDB is not Faster than ClickHouse
1–10 of 73 posts
Re: No, QuestDB is not Faster than ClickHouse
#2Sounds like they didn't re-do the QuestDB benchmark with same change to the indexes, and so their claim is that Clickhouse is 27x faster with a specific index than QuestDB without that index. Which is not a fair comparison.
Also, the tone of the post sounds really arrogant. They try to hide it a bit, I feel, but it just seeps through.
Re: No, QuestDB is not Faster than ClickHouse
#3Sounds like they didn't re-do the QuestDB benchmark with same change to the indexes, and so their claim is that Clickhouse is 27x faster with a specific index than QuestDB without that index. Which is not a fair comparison. Also, the tone of the post sounds really arrogant. They try to hide it a bit, I feel, but it just seeps through.
I didn't really read it as arrogant, more as annoyed about a mischaracterization that was disparaging their product.
Re: No, QuestDB is not Faster than ClickHouse
#4Sounds like they didn't re-do the QuestDB benchmark with same change to the indexes, and so their claim is that Clickhouse is 27x faster with a specific index than QuestDB without that index. Which is not a fair comparison. Also, the tone of the post sounds really arrogant. They try to hide it a bit, I feel, but it just seeps through.
I didn't really read it as arrogant, more as annoyed about a mischaracterization that was disparaging their product.
It's also part of a longer trend of saber rattling between these vendors - there's a history of these types of posts also from TimescaleDB: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29096541
Re: No, QuestDB is not Faster than ClickHouse
#5Sounds like they didn't re-do the QuestDB benchmark with same change to the indexes, and so their claim is that Clickhouse is 27x faster with a specific index than QuestDB without that index. Which is not a fair comparison. Also, the tone of the post sounds really arrogant. They try to hide it a bit, I feel, but it just seeps through.
Well, I don't know how QuestDB works, and I couldn't find anything in the original benchmark, but probably they already have some sort of (geo)index in place? It's really strange to search geo-data by scanning the whole surface of the Earth. The point that Clickhouse outperforms this by just sorting on one axis (and even not using any fancy 2D indices) is reasonable.
Re: No, QuestDB is not Faster than ClickHouse
#6This response illustrates important point - if you're expert in technology A and compare it to technology B, you're not expert in, comparison is very likely to be unfair.
I very much would like to see vendors at least to follow Journalist ethics and reach out to their competition for optimization comments and suggestions before publishing it, so others are given a chance to suggest optimizations
Re: No, QuestDB is not Faster than ClickHouse
#7Sounds like they didn't re-do the QuestDB benchmark with same change to the indexes, and so their claim is that Clickhouse is 27x faster with a specific index than QuestDB without that index. Which is not a fair comparison. Also, the tone of the post sounds really arrogant. They try to hide it a bit, I feel, but it just seeps through.
[deleted]
Re: No, QuestDB is not Faster than ClickHouse
#8Sounds like they didn't re-do the QuestDB benchmark with same change to the indexes, and so their claim is that Clickhouse is 27x faster with a specific index than QuestDB without that index. Which is not a fair comparison. Also, the tone of the post sounds really arrogant. They try to hide it a bit, I feel, but it just seeps through.
Well, I don't know how QuestDB works, and I couldn't find anything in the original benchmark, but probably they already have some sort of (geo)index in place? It's really strange to search geo-data by scanning the whole surface of the Earth. The point that Clickhouse outperforms this by just sorting on one axis (and even not using any fancy 2D indices) is reasonable.
I was curious to hear more details about this statement - "while QuestDB utilizes its full indexing strategy to read just a tiny fraction of the actual data". Did QuestDB create indexes in their QuestDB benchmark but just not mention it? Are there geoindexes which are automatically enabled which do help (but are of less value in the general sense from Clickhouse' perspective)?
Re: No, QuestDB is not Faster than ClickHouse
#9Earlier quoted context omitted.
I didn't really read it as arrogant, more as annoyed about a mischaracterization that was disparaging their product.
It's also part of a longer trend of saber rattling between these vendors - there's a history of these types of posts also from TimescaleDB: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29096541
There is a small list of vendors that do not forbid to run benchmarks with their systems.
https://cube.dev/blog/dewitt-clause-or-can-you-benchmark-a-d...
That is why there is a small subset of vendors that are being 'attacked' by this comparisons.
Re: No, QuestDB is not Faster than ClickHouse
#10Is there an existing named adage for something like "if one creates a benchmark in order to rank general performance of some products, some of those products will ultimately sacrifice general performance in order to optimize for that benchmark"?