ClickHouse vs. Presto

The most important thing when using ClickHouse is to be clear that the scenarios in which you want to use it really are the right ones. Many users think that when a database is very fast for a specific use case, it can be extrapolated to other contexts (most of the time different) in which a previous analysis has not been carried out.

ClickHouse is an analytical database, as such, it should be used for such purposes, where the information is stored correctly, the data volumes are really large and the queries to be performed are not the typical traditional queries on several columns with multiple aggregations. ClickHouse is not the solution for this.

On the other hand, if your case is not one of the above, it is quite possible that ClickHouse can help you. Where ClickHouse shines is when you are looking for aggregation over a particular column in large volumes of data.

Incentivized

Presto is for interactive simple queries, where Hive is for reliable processing. If you have a fact-dim join, presto is great..however for fact-fact joins presto is not the solution.. Presto is a great replacement for proprietary technology like Vertica

Incentivized

• Opensource
• High performance
• Multiple engines to adapt user cases
• Easy configuration of data replication

Incentivized

• Linking, embedding links and adding images is easy enough.
• Once you have become familiar with the interface, Presto becomes very quick & easy to use (but, you have to practice & repeat to know what you are doing - it is not as intuitive as one would hope).
• Organizing & design is fairly simple with click & drag parameters.

Incentivized

• Avro data manipulation
• Kafka consistency
• DDL operations errors (by replica configuration)

Incentivized

• Presto was not designed for large fact fact joins. This is by design as presto does not leverage disk and used memory for processing which in turn makes it fast.. However, this is a tradeoff..in an ideal world, people would like to use one system for all their use cases, and presto should get exhaustive by solving this problem.
• Resource allocation is not similar to YARN and presto has a priority queue based query resource allocation..so a query that takes long takes longer...this might be alleviated by giving some more control back to the user to define priority/override.
• UDF Support is not available in presto. You will have to write your own functions..while this is good for performance, it comes at a huge overhead of building exclusively for presto and not being interoperable with other systems like Hive, SparkSQL etc.

Incentivized

ClickHouse was not compared to them as a competitor but as the ideal partner to complete an information analysis system, providing users with the most complete and efficient tools. Therefore, in this case it was considered that it would be the ideal candidate due to its characteristics compared to the other competitors.

Incentivized

Presto is good for a templated design appeal. You cannot be too creative via this interface - but, the layout and options make the finalized visual product appealing to customers. The other design products I use are for different purposes and not really comparable to Presto.

Incentivized

• Queries that used to take more than 2 minutes now take less than 1 second
• Possibility to analyze use cases in real time (before was impossible)
• The applications are more complete and the users decisions are better

Incentivized

• Presto has helped scale Uber's interactive data needs. We have migrated a lot out of proprietary tech like Vertica.
• Presto has helped build data driven applications on its stack than maintain a separate online/offline stack.
• Presto has helped us build data exploration tools by leveraging it's power of interactive and is immensely valuable for data scientists.

Incentivized