simon.2.thompson@... 2013-11-07, 07:55
There's a comparison of a few of these in this document. Perhaps Presto
needs to be added.
On 7 November 2013 07:55, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi there,
> the appearance of Presto stimulates a thought that a list and overview of
> engines of this sort would be jolly useful for general understanding and
> management of FUD in the enterprise....
> I think that these engines are purposed for responsiveness for queries
> that can be written to generate relatively little interconnect traffic on a
> I know of :
> Drill (doh)
> Gryphon (uses H-BASE?)
> BlinkDB (slightly different, uses bootstrapping for aggregates)
> I believe that Stinger should be thought of as something else -
> optimisations of an engine purposed for large scale queries.
> Is this view close to correct?
> Can anyone elucidate on the statements about Impala doing record
> materialisation where as other engines do vectorization? Is vectorization
> query rewriting for parallelism?
> How do the folk in the Drill project see the plethora of efforts? Does
> anyone have a view as to why there are so many engines appearing?
> Dr. Simon Thompson
> Chief Researcher, Customer Experience.
> BT Research.
> BT plc. PP11J. MLBG BT Adastral Park, Martlesham Heath.
> IP5 3RE
> Note :
> This email contains BT information, which may be privileged or
> confidential. It's meant only for the individual(s) or entity named above.
> If you're not the intended recipient, note that disclosing, copying,
> distributing or using this information is prohibited. If you've received
> this email in error, please let me know immediately on the email address
> above. Thank you.
> We monitor our email system, and may record your emails.
> British Telecommunications plc
> Registered office: 81 Newgate Street London EC1A 7AJ
> Registered in England no: 1800000
Michael Hausenblas 2013-11-07, 10:40