Also, regarding something like redshift not having MLlib built in, much of that could be done on the derived results. On Aug 6, 2014 4:07 PM, "Nicholas Chammas" <nicholas.cham...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 3:41 PM, Daniel, Ronald (ELS-SDG)< > r.dan...@elsevier.com> wrote: > >> Mostly I was just objecting to " Redshift does very well, but Shark is >> on par or better than it in most of the tests " when that was not how I >> read the results, and Redshift was on HDDs. > > > My bad. You are correct; the only test Shark (mem) does better on is test > #1 "Scan Query". > > And indeed, it would be good to see an updated benchmark with Redshift > running on SSDs. > > Nick >
