A short and very un-honest comparison of these two systems.
There are different techniques to test and each system describes how to better test it. So to have the results that somehow show how the systems will behave under Zabbix history load, i tried to reproduce the exact type and way of load they could be under Zabbix history saving and retrieval.
I've used HTTP interfaces of both and curl to submit end extract data. On data submit there was chunks of 1000 rows. This exactly what ZABBIX does. On data retrieval i did several tests on extracting a last value, last 5 values, and all values for an item.
Both databases where empty before test. Totally i've added about 30 million records to each one. That's quite a low number to understand a long-term behavior.
There was about one month of test Zabbix data collected in Clickhouse already, i did some tests on our Clickhouse install to see degradation of data retrieval on large amounts of data and long history term. I didn't see any performance drop at all. So I've decided to do the same to Elasticssearch if it will outperform Clickhouse on small amounts of data. That didn't happen.
For test i've used freshly installed non-tuned databases.
I didn't do MySQL test for two reasons: there are many MySQL vs Clickhouse compraisons showing better performance and data compression of the latter.
Here, and here, or try to google for a dosen others.
And the other reason is the fact we've learned from existing Zabbix install: MySQL performance degrades dramatically on large volumes of data, prtitionazing helps, but still it will even slower.
So the test graph:
A few comments:
1. The only metric where Elastics has beaten Clickhouse is CPU usage on data fetch, but it's quite low difference. Considering how much CPU Elastics needs for storing data, Clickhouse uses totally less CPU.
2. Please pay attention how little disk, IOPS, CPU clickhouse needs to write data. Also due to compression Clickhouse needs 11 times less drive space then Elastics. Comparing to MySQL it 18 times less disk space.
So, short conclusion: i see NO reason NOT to use Clickhouse.
There are different techniques to test and each system describes how to better test it. So to have the results that somehow show how the systems will behave under Zabbix history load, i tried to reproduce the exact type and way of load they could be under Zabbix history saving and retrieval.
I've used HTTP interfaces of both and curl to submit end extract data. On data submit there was chunks of 1000 rows. This exactly what ZABBIX does. On data retrieval i did several tests on extracting a last value, last 5 values, and all values for an item.
Both databases where empty before test. Totally i've added about 30 million records to each one. That's quite a low number to understand a long-term behavior.
There was about one month of test Zabbix data collected in Clickhouse already, i did some tests on our Clickhouse install to see degradation of data retrieval on large amounts of data and long history term. I didn't see any performance drop at all. So I've decided to do the same to Elasticssearch if it will outperform Clickhouse on small amounts of data. That didn't happen.
For test i've used freshly installed non-tuned databases.
I didn't do MySQL test for two reasons: there are many MySQL vs Clickhouse compraisons showing better performance and data compression of the latter.
Here, and here, or try to google for a dosen others.
And the other reason is the fact we've learned from existing Zabbix install: MySQL performance degrades dramatically on large volumes of data, prtitionazing helps, but still it will even slower.
So the test graph:
A few comments:
1. The only metric where Elastics has beaten Clickhouse is CPU usage on data fetch, but it's quite low difference. Considering how much CPU Elastics needs for storing data, Clickhouse uses totally less CPU.
2. Please pay attention how little disk, IOPS, CPU clickhouse needs to write data. Also due to compression Clickhouse needs 11 times less drive space then Elastics. Comparing to MySQL it 18 times less disk space.
So, short conclusion: i see NO reason NOT to use Clickhouse.
No comments:
Post a Comment