Timescale reposted this
I came across this article about "SQL as fast as NoSQL" today (as always great content Franck Pachot and Yugabyte). I know it's not the point of the article, but what took my eye was the table showing independent ingest benchmarking, with TimescaleDB topping the list 👀. I got old mate ChatGPT to work out the relative ingest rates as percentages 🔥: --- Here are the relative insert speeds as percentages compared to TimescaleDB #TimescaleDB: 100.00% (600,000 inserts/sec) #InfluxDB: 76.67% (460,000 inserts/sec) #PostgreSQL: 71.33% (428,000 inserts/sec) #Cassandra async inserts: 68.33% (410,000 inserts/sec) #Cassandra sync inserts: 64.83% (389,000 inserts/sec) #YugabyteDB YSQL: 49.17% (295,000 inserts/sec) #YugabyteDB YCQL: 48.00% (288,000 inserts/sec) #Elasticsearch: 28.33% (170,000 inserts/sec) #ArrangoDB: 22.83% (137,000 inserts/sec) #CockroachDB: 15.17% (91,000 inserts/sec)
Developer Advocate for YugabyteDB🔸SQL, Database Tuning & DBA (Oracle Certified Master, PostgreSQL)🔸AWS Data Hero
2moYes and YugabyteDB topping the distributed SQL ones. Without surprises the top half which is single pod is faster than the lower half that replicates to be resilient to failures. IoT use cases may or may not allow downtime, so good to have the choice. The same benchmark also looks at analytic queries on timeseries where TimescaleDB shines