Hi, I did not know what to change there for renaming the bench, as the bench name seems to be used in different places. I thus started with an issue, https://github.com/h2oai/db-benchmark/issues/229.
Best, Jorge On Fri, Jun 25, 2021 at 1:04 PM Wes McKinney <wesmck...@gmail.com> wrote: > I recommend sending a PR to the benchmark repo that clarifies that > it's executing the query using the arrow R/C++ library, when in fact > the query is actually primarily handled by dplyr and not Arrow at all. > The benchmark is very misleading in its current form. > > On Fri, Jun 25, 2021 at 11:55 AM Jorge Cardoso Leitão > <jorgecarlei...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > HO2 has a set of benchmarks comparing different query engines [1]. > > > > There is currently an implementation named "Arrow", backed by the Arrow R > > implementation [2]. > > > > This is one of the least performant implementations evaluated. I sense > that > > this may negatively affect the Arrow format, as people will (even if > > unfairly) associate "Arrow" to "poor performance". In fact, polars and > > cuDF, the top performers, also use Arrow as their backing in-memory > format. > > > > Would it make sense to avoid naming specific query engines as "Arrow" > (e.g. > > like we do with DataFusion, Grandiva, etc), so that these > misunderstandings > > are avoided? > > > > Best, > > Jorge > > > > [1] https://h2oai.github.io/db-benchmark/ > > [2] https://github.com/h2oai/db-benchmark/tree/master/arrow >