LucidDB's performance relative to MonetDB and InfoBright

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
4 messages Options
OG
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

LucidDB's performance relative to MonetDB and InfoBright

OG
Hi,

I just came across http://www.mysqlperformanceblog.com/2009/10/26/air-traffic-queries-in-luciddb/comment-page-1/ where LucidDB didn't look so good.  Is that type of performance relative to MonetDB and InfoBright performance typical/to be expected from LucidDB?

I'm not sure what version of LucidDB was used in that test...

Thanks,
Otis

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Verizon Developer Community
Take advantage of Verizon's best-in-class app development support
A streamlined, 14 day to market process makes app distribution fast and easy
Join now and get one step closer to millions of Verizon customers
http://p.sf.net/sfu/verizon-dev2dev 
_______________________________________________
luciddb-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/luciddb-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: LucidDB's performance relative to MonetDB and InfoBright

Nicholas Goodman

On Dec 17, 2009, at 4:45 AM, OG wrote:

> I just came across http://www.mysqlperformanceblog.com/2009/10/26/air-traffic-queries-in-luciddb/comment-page-1/ 
>  where LucidDB didn't look so good.  Is that type of performance  
> relative to MonetDB and InfoBright performance typical/to be  
> expected from LucidDB?

Otis,

The queries with a single table, and heavily "count" focused without  
much in terms of selectivity are Infobrights sweet spot.  Our TPCH  
(that include more general joins) and our SSB (star queries) we show  
better results.  Percona, the group that did the benchmark you  
mentioned, is doing an SSB benchmark and in that one we outperform  
Infobright (on several) and MonetDB (most).

What matters is your dataset and use:  If your queries resemble the  
single table, air traffic queries with many counts than the other  
engines will be faster.  If your queries look a bit more like TPCH  
(with a few joins) or SSB (http://www.percona.com/docs/wiki/_media/benchmark:ssb:starschemab.pdf 
) then LucidDB may be your better fit.

Kind Regards,
Nick

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Verizon Developer Community
Take advantage of Verizon's best-in-class app development support
A streamlined, 14 day to market process makes app distribution fast and easy
Join now and get one step closer to millions of Verizon customers
http://p.sf.net/sfu/verizon-dev2dev 
_______________________________________________
luciddb-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/luciddb-users
OG
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: LucidDB's performance relative to MonetDB and InfoBright

OG
Hello,

So the flight data/schema was very flat, not star-y, and that's not what LucidDB is built for, is what you are saying, right?  


I tried looking for the SSB benchmark from Percona that includes LucidDB, but could not find it.  Do you have the URL?

Thanks,
Otis



----- Original Message ----

> From: Nicholas Goodman <[hidden email]>
> To: OG <[hidden email]>
> Cc: [hidden email]
> Sent: Thu, December 17, 2009 11:57:43 AM
> Subject: Re: [luciddb-users] LucidDB's performance relative to MonetDB and InfoBright
>
>
> On Dec 17, 2009, at 4:45 AM, OG wrote:
>
> > I just came across
> http://www.mysqlperformanceblog.com/2009/10/26/air-traffic-queries-in-luciddb/comment-page-1/ 
> where LucidDB didn't look so good.  Is that type of performance relative to
> MonetDB and InfoBright performance typical/to be expected from LucidDB?
>
> Otis,
>
> The queries with a single table, and heavily "count" focused without much in
> terms of selectivity are Infobrights sweet spot.  Our TPCH (that include more
> general joins) and our SSB (star queries) we show better results.  Percona, the
> group that did the benchmark you mentioned, is doing an SSB benchmark and in
> that one we outperform Infobright (on several) and MonetDB (most).
>
> What matters is your dataset and use:  If your queries resemble the single
> table, air traffic queries with many counts than the other engines will be
> faster.  If your queries look a bit more like TPCH (with a few joins) or SSB
> (http://www.percona.com/docs/wiki/_media/benchmark:ssb:starschemab.pdf) then
> LucidDB may be your better fit.
>
> Kind Regards,
> Nick


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Verizon Developer Community
Take advantage of Verizon's best-in-class app development support
A streamlined, 14 day to market process makes app distribution fast and easy
Join now and get one step closer to millions of Verizon customers
http://p.sf.net/sfu/verizon-dev2dev 
_______________________________________________
luciddb-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/luciddb-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: LucidDB's performance relative to MonetDB and InfoBright

Francisco Reyes-3
In reply to this post by Nicholas Goodman
Nicholas Goodman writes:

> What matters is your dataset and use:  If your queries resemble the  

Just to add a bit on that.
Some months back I did some benchmarks of our data (where i work)  on
Postgresql vs Lucid. Lucid was up to 100 times faster on some queries. After
finding an issue with Postgresql plan and forcing a better plan, Lucid was
still 4 times better. The data set was nearly 200GB.

This was using schemas straight from Postgresql. Right now, as times allows,
I am changing the schemas to star schemas. It is a low priority project and
there is a lot of data to convert, but should have another set of tests in a
few months.

OG,
The best you can do is just try a database and see how it performs with your
data and how you like the program in general. I looked at or tried all the
DBs you listed and each has some selling points, but none is perfect.
Example: fastbit is just a set of libraries; you have to write programs to
do all the work. In an adhoc heavy environment, like where I work, it is not
flexible enough.

So far between Postgresql and Lucid I think I can manage all my projects.
The only thing preventing me, and where I work, from using Lucid more is the
lack of easy connectivity in PHP (currently working on solving that with
Nicholas).

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Verizon Developer Community
Take advantage of Verizon's best-in-class app development support
A streamlined, 14 day to market process makes app distribution fast and easy
Join now and get one step closer to millions of Verizon customers
http://p.sf.net/sfu/verizon-dev2dev 
_______________________________________________
luciddb-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/luciddb-users
Loading...