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

CockroachDB 2.0 Performance Makes Significant Strides

cockroachlabs.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 187 posts

Re: CockroachDB 2.0 Performance Makes Significant Strides

#71

Post by pinars »

arjunnarayan wrote: post #60
pinars wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you can still drive some insights. I clicked on the TPC-C results you shared and read their executive summaries. The Oracle on SPARC cluster (at the top, 2010) performs 30.2M qualified tx/min vs the 16K tx/min in this blog post. The Oracle cluster also costs $30M, which is clearly higher than the Cockroach cluster's cost. That said, the TPC-C benchmark is new to me. Happy to update this comment if I'm misread…

A short note that the total cost of that SPARC cluster was $30 million. You're not misreading those numbers, but it requires a little context. We're focusing today on our improvements over CockroachDB 1.1, using a small-ish cluster. We'll be showing some more scalability with larger clusters in the coming weeks. If you've found CockroachDB performance slow in the past, you will be pleasantly surprised with this relea…

Sure thing. I was primarily answering the question above - in terms of how the numbers in the TPC-C benchmark fit in. I updated my comment to reflect the cost.

I think what's interesting with TPC-C is that you can sort the results based on performance or price/performance. On the price/performance metric, SPARC looks expensive. Dell has a $20K SQL Anywhere cluster that can do 113K tx/min.

I wonder if anyone tried to run these benchmarks on the cloud and how one would calculate total cost of ownership there now.

Re: CockroachDB 2.0 Performance Makes Significant Strides

#72

Post by mlevental »

jrs95 wrote: post #67
mlevental wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I can't see serious engineers working on a company named "Cockroach". You used to work at a company called Yammer . God forbid they're not called tech.ai.io-ify. I think it's really funny that this comes up almost every time there's a post about CockroachDB. There were also a lot of people commenting on https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16693253 about foul language and such. I also remember being at a big confere…

>I also remember being at a big conference and one of the speakers being a little cavalier and dropping an obscenity for emphasis - in the meetup comments people were so deeply offended Fuck those guys lol

>Fuck those guys lol

indeed

Re: CockroachDB 2.0 Performance Makes Significant Strides

#73

Post by andrewflnr »

mlevental wrote: post #64
ardit33 wrote: post #58

And their fucking stupid name..... if they fail, they surely will be remembered as the company with the idiotic name. I can't see serious engineers working on a company named "Cockroach".

>I can't see serious engineers working on a company named "Cockroach". You used to work at a company called Yammer . God forbid they're not called tech.ai.io-ify. I think it's really funny that this comes up almost every time there's a post about CockroachDB. There were also a lot of people commenting on https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16693253 about foul language and such. I also remember being at a big confere…

They need a cute mascot, with a name. Then when people go "ew, it has a bug in it's name !!1!" we can say, "Aw, what's wrong with bugs? You're making Ricky cry."

Re: CockroachDB 2.0 Performance Makes Significant Strides

#74

Post by qaq »

pinars wrote: post #71
arjunnarayan wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A short note that the total cost of that SPARC cluster was $30 million. You're not misreading those numbers, but it requires a little context. We're focusing today on our improvements over CockroachDB 1.1, using a small-ish cluster. We'll be showing some more scalability with larger clusters in the coming weeks. If you've found CockroachDB performance slow in the past, you will be pleasantly surprised with this relea…

Sure thing. I was primarily answering the question above - in terms of how the numbers in the TPC-C benchmark fit in. I updated my comment to reflect the cost. I think what's interesting with TPC-C is that you can sort the results based on performance or price/performance. On the price/performance metric, SPARC looks expensive. Dell has a $20K SQL Anywhere cluster that can do 113K tx/min. I wonder if anyone tried to…

you do realize it's ancient hardware thats $300-400 USD on ebay now.

Re: CockroachDB 2.0 Performance Makes Significant Strides

#75

Post by ahmedalsudani »

sheeeep86 wrote: post #61

I dont like when companies are not transparent about the pricing of their product. If you have a price page, show the price, so that Í can decide if this is relevant for me or not ...

The only thing the Enterprise offering gives you is priority access.

Re: CockroachDB 2.0 Performance Makes Significant Strides

#76

Post by awalton »

mlevental wrote: post #64
ardit33 wrote: post #58

And their fucking stupid name..... if they fail, they surely will be remembered as the company with the idiotic name. I can't see serious engineers working on a company named "Cockroach".

>I can't see serious engineers working on a company named "Cockroach". You used to work at a company called Yammer . God forbid they're not called tech.ai.io-ify. I think it's really funny that this comes up almost every time there's a post about CockroachDB. There were also a lot of people commenting on https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16693253 about foul language and such. I also remember being at a big confere…

People have been complaining about "The GIMP" for literally decades... (edit: in case this isn't clear, Spencer Kimball, the CEO of CockroachLabs, also created "The GIMP" at Berkeley).

Sadly, names do matter. Cockroach seems to be a great DB from my poking at it, but there's definitely a visceral reaction some people have to the name (myself included) that has to be overcome first.

Re: CockroachDB 2.0 Performance Makes Significant Strides

#77

Post by wufufufu »

farseer wrote: post #56
johnmarcus wrote: post #42

I will not use this product based on it's name alone, it give me jeepers. Petty? Damn straight it's petty. Doesn't make it less real though.

Came here to say the same! I am sorry but this name alone prevents me from exploring this product. Whoever chose that has probably never encountered a cockroach....flying.

Shame. We've got a CockroachDB infestation in both our East and West datacenters and it's been critical in reliably scaling thus far.

Sometimes a CockroachDB egg sac will go down, but we can spawn another which will hatch very quickly.

The only downside is when our ORM burrows deeply into human ears, causing pain and hearing loss.

Re: CockroachDB 2.0 Performance Makes Significant Strides

#78

Post by mjibson »

ahmedalsudani wrote: post #75
sheeeep86 wrote: post #61

I dont like when companies are not transparent about the pricing of their product. If you have a price page, show the price, so that Í can decide if this is relevant for me or not ...

The only thing the Enterprise offering gives you is priority access.

Enterprise allows access to various features like distributed backup and restore.

Re: CockroachDB 2.0 Performance Makes Significant Strides

#79

Post by manigandham »

shaklee3 wrote: post #54
manigandham wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're not going to get better performance for OLAP than MemSQL's columnstore and in-memory rowstore for reference tables to join. Citus is great if you want the Postgres interface but is still using standard rowstore tables. CockroachDB is similar with rowstore performance but with added distributed consensus overhead. They are both much better for OLTP and sharding. CockroachDB also provides easy high-availability…

kdb+?

Sure, but it's far more expensive and not as generally usable as the mysql-flavored MemSQL for common data warehouse scenarios. Performance will be similar but there are differences in functionality like kdb's asof joins that can't really be compared.

kdb+ is much better for numeric/financial analysis apps, especially when used with the integrated query language and interpreter environment.

Re: CockroachDB 2.0 Performance Makes Significant Strides

#80

Post by didip »

welder wrote: post #5
baconomatic wrote: post #2

I'd love to hear from someone who has implemented this in production. Seems like really cool tech, but haven't had a chance to use it on a project yet.

Using it in production currently with dual-write and dual-read to compare perf. I'll do a write-up showing how Cockroach performs to Citus and Cassandra for my use case.

Please post your write-up on HN! I would love to read CockroachDB performing in real world.
Post reply on HN