The ingest time is due to updating the merge tree. You don't need a merge tree for etl... It's like the worst backing store you could possibly choose. You're also comparing an intentionally horizontally distributed query to a purely vertical one on a single node. You can see just slightly below the same query takes 0.2 seconds on a single node.
I was hoping to see some serious consideration given to these kinds of benchmarks, considering Clickhouse is one of the most cost effective tools I've used in the real world and occasionally outperforms things like mapd.
I was expecting your solution to outperform Clickhouse at least in some aspects, and a benchmark showing where it wins. Instead you reveal ignorance of Clickhouse and even the benchmarks you linked.
Your comment comes off as incredibly arrogant and at the same time incredibly misinformed. Disappointing to see this attitude from the team.
I was hoping to see some serious consideration given to these kinds of benchmarks, considering Clickhouse is one of the most cost effective tools I've used in the real world and occasionally outperforms things like mapd.
I was expecting your solution to outperform Clickhouse at least in some aspects, and a benchmark showing where it wins. Instead you reveal ignorance of Clickhouse and even the benchmarks you linked.
Your comment comes off as incredibly arrogant and at the same time incredibly misinformed. Disappointing to see this attitude from the team.