I don't buy this "object storage + Iceberg is all you need for OLAP" hype. If the application has sustained query load, it makes sense to provision servers rather than go pure serverless. If there are already provisioned servers, it makes sense to cache data on them (either in their memory or SSDs) to avoid round-trips to object storage. This is the architecture of the latest breed of OLAP databases such as Databend and Firebolt, as well as the latest iterations of Redshift's and Snowflake's architecture. Also, this is the approach of the newest breed of vector databases, such as Turbopuffer.
For OLAP use cases with real-time data ingestion requirements, object-storage-only approach also leads to write amplification. Therefore, I don't think that architectures like Apache Pinot, Apache Paimon, and Apache Druid are going anywhere.
Another problem with "open table formats" like Iceberg, Hudi, and Delta Lake is their slow innovation speed.
For OLAP use cases with real-time data ingestion requirements, object-storage-only approach also leads to write amplification. Therefore, I don't think that architectures like Apache Pinot, Apache Paimon, and Apache Druid are going anywhere.
Another problem with "open table formats" like Iceberg, Hudi, and Delta Lake is their slow innovation speed.
I've recently argued about this at greater length here: https://engineeringideas.substack.com/p/the-future-of-olap-t...