mejakethomas

Snowflake too.

Inefficient sql? Crank the virtual warehouse.

Yes! This!!!

Volume != Quality

So what I'm hearing is it's not the size of your data that matters, it's how you use it?

Completely agree. Currently staring at 700k+ BigQuery costs annually and accomplished MUCH more with Snowflake at the same price.

This. Snowflake introspection five years ago looks very, very different than today. Mostly due to enhancement requests.

Totally agree with Redshift sentiments. It's been lovely seeing BigQuery and Redshift step their game up over the past 1.5yrs, because they really should have been doing certain things for many years prior.

Re: Firebolt, I don't consider it to be in the same class as Snowflake whatsoever (even though their advertising seems to indicate otherwise). Snowflake is like a very powerful swiss army knife. Firebolt is good for a very specific (dare I say niche?) workload but falls all over itself for the vast majority of data org needs.

This, 100%.

It eats/consolidates formerly-disparate costs around the org. Because it's so good.

Which makes it look expensive.

It's not expensive.

What it can do, successfully, with three engineers was previously impossible with dozens.

What IS expensive is not being careful with it.

Ah yes, the common misconception that trades are simplistic!

Most trades (!including plumbing!) have VASTLY more stringent requirements than tech, are often more mentally stimulating, and yes, quite rewarding.

Disclaimer: I've worked in software for ~9 years and worked in trades before that. ASE master certified auto technician, father is a master electrician, uncles are contractors. I'll probably become a plumber.