Generally speaking, I've found scalability of postgres to be much better than that of hived for social data. And it's also a much friendlier/safer environment for programmers who aren't aware of all the delicate issues associated with changing hived.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
Oh right rocksdb vs postgres of course and I agree, postgresql has wide adoption. But it is bit complicated to scale it, with our current use, it will be ok though. Later replicas and rearranging tables might help...
I did some analysis a couple of weeks ago, and most of the slow down in hived API response time isn't really related to rocksdb itself. The first issue was related to locking, but we improved that a lot already.
In my limited tests, there were usually two remaining causes for slow API call response times: 1) computation of results that could/should have been cached and 2) time to serialize output data (often supplying data that wasn't even strictly needed for most applications).
But the schema changes required to fix some of these issues will be much easier to do in postgresql. And I also see some nice potential benefits with postgresql having built-in interpreters (more about that later).