TimescaleDB vs ClickHouse
pradeepchhetri.xyz
TimescaleDB vs ClickHouse
1–10 of 76 posts
Re: TimescaleDB vs ClickHouse
#2Key quote from the article:
> Overall, although some TimescaleDB queries became faster by enabling compression but many others became bit slower probably due to decompression overhead. This may be the reason why TimescaleDB disable compression by default
This matches my experience: ClickHouse is generally faster, and a better solution for time series (more robust, more mature, ...) unless you have a highly specific set of constrains (ex: must be able to delete individual records, ...) and sacrificing performance for them is an acceptable tradeoff.
I have no doubt that, as usual, akulkarni will make a good PR job / community outreach to explain why, numbers and experience be damned, TimescaleDB is better!
But I suggest interested readers check the history of previous "creative engineering" around tests that has been done to make TimescaleDB come out ahead: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28945903
In 99% of the case, ClickHouse is the right choice, especially if you care about the license not adding too many restrictions.
Re: TimescaleDB vs ClickHouse
#3I see a lot of really divergent results with these time series database benchmarking posts.
Timescale's open source benchmark suite[0] is a great contribution towards making different software comparable, but it seems like the tasks/metrics heavily favor TimescaleDB.
This article has Clickhouse more-or-less spanking TimescaleDB, but the blog post it references[1] is basically the reverse. Are the use cases just that different?
-----
0. https://github.com/timescale/tsbs
1. https://blog.timescale.com/blog/what-is-clickhouse-how-does-...
Re: TimescaleDB vs ClickHouse
#4I see a lot of really divergent results with these time series database benchmarking posts. Timescale's open source benchmark suite[0] is a great contribution towards making different software comparable, but it seems like the tasks/metrics heavily favor TimescaleDB. This article has Clickhouse more-or-less spanking TimescaleDB, but the blog post it references[1] is basically the reverse. Are the use cases just that…
As someone who has used both in production environments under various workloads, I can, without a doubt, tell you that Clickhouse spanks the crap out of TimescaleDB.
The only use case where TimescaleDB is more useful is the ability to mutating/deleting single rows but even there, Clickhouse offers some workarounds at the expense of a little extra storage until a compaction is run similar to VACUUM.
Clickhouse is to TimescaleDB what Nginx was to Apache.
Re: TimescaleDB vs ClickHouse
#5This has been my experience with ClickHouse as well...that is, you can basically close your eyes while writing the schema and still maintain to get extremely impressive performance.
That being said, ClickHouse also has a ton of clever levers you can pull to squeeze out better performance and compression which aren't used by default, such as using Delta/DoubleDelta CODECs with LZ4/ZSTD compression, etc. Not to mention, MATERIALIZED VIEWs and/or the relatively newer feature MergeTree Projections[1]
[1] https://clickhouse.com/docs/en/engines/table-engines/mergetr...
Re: TimescaleDB vs ClickHouse
#6Clickhouse has done a performance benchmark with a much more bigger dataset and they have published the results in their website at [1]
https://clickhouse.com/benchmark/dbms
Re: TimescaleDB vs ClickHouse
#7I see a lot of really divergent results with these time series database benchmarking posts. Timescale's open source benchmark suite[0] is a great contribution towards making different software comparable, but it seems like the tasks/metrics heavily favor TimescaleDB. This article has Clickhouse more-or-less spanking TimescaleDB, but the blog post it references[1] is basically the reverse. Are the use cases just that…
As someone who has used both in production environments under various workloads, I can, without a doubt, tell you that Clickhouse spanks the crap out of TimescaleDB. The only use case where TimescaleDB is more useful is the ability to mutating/deleting single rows but even there, Clickhouse offers some workarounds at the expense of a little extra storage until a compaction is run similar to VACUUM. Clickhouse is to T…
> I can, without a doubt, tell you that Clickhouse spanks the crap out of TimescaleDB.
Same. I'm ready to believe my experience is not representative, but I've rarely heard something different after talking to people who've seriously evaluated both.
> Clickhouse is to TimescaleDB what Nginx was to Apache.
Perfect comparison. Except I don't remember Apache cooking some tests to pretend they are faster than nginx, or astroturfing communities :)
Different tools serve different purposes, simple as that.
If TimescaleDB or Apache does the job for you, stick with them.
When you will want to scale / increase performance or just rewrite, chose the better option of the day.
In 2021, Clickhouse should be a recommended default, like nginx.
Re: TimescaleDB vs ClickHouse
#8I have similar experience with ClickHouse, it just works
Re: TimescaleDB vs ClickHouse
#9Wait was not TimescaleDB completely leave Clickhouse in the dust both in terms of query performance and compression ?
https://blog.timescale.com/blog/what-is-clickhouse-how-does-...
I think this series of posts confirms the first law of Benchmarketing - for any system one can come up with "unbiased" benchmark which confirms its superiority
Re: TimescaleDB vs ClickHouse
#10I see a lot of really divergent results with these time series database benchmarking posts. Timescale's open source benchmark suite[0] is a great contribution towards making different software comparable, but it seems like the tasks/metrics heavily favor TimescaleDB. This article has Clickhouse more-or-less spanking TimescaleDB, but the blog post it references[1] is basically the reverse. Are the use cases just that…
As someone who has used both in production environments under various workloads, I can, without a doubt, tell you that Clickhouse spanks the crap out of TimescaleDB. The only use case where TimescaleDB is more useful is the ability to mutating/deleting single rows but even there, Clickhouse offers some workarounds at the expense of a little extra storage until a compaction is run similar to VACUUM. Clickhouse is to T…
I think both Clickhouse and TimeScaleDB are great systems with different design goals and approaches. Specifically I think Clickhouse is much better suited to "Event Logs" than "Metrics" storage (Clickhouse Inspired VM does well in this regard)
I would just encourage all vendors to be more humble positioning their benchmarks. In my practice production behaviors for better or worse rarely resemble benchmark results