If your job is to slice&dice data all day, and can't be bothered to learn SQL, I don't know what to say.
Also it’s not unreasonable to see people spending $10K+ a day in Snowflake because bad practices just like this.
Learn SQL ffs.
oh my god
i'm currently $13k/mo in dynamodb costs because of this whereas the same requirements sql database costs $2k/mo
Can’t think of a worse advertisement for their product.
After reading it, i was curious what the writer’s relationship was with TinyBird. Was he/she a recent user?
Then i put my palm over my face..
https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/rules-materializedvi...
> That work towards incrementally updated views is happening and progressing. For now, it's a separate extension, though: https://github.com/sraoss/pg_ivm.
in my experience materialized views are critical for most large databases.
Materialized views wouldn't be a silver bullet, but it would certainly help by allowing us to "cache" all of the joins and pre-processing into indexable views.
I worked on a system to capture the production test data in a semiconductor company. We had trillions of rows and terabytes of data. While we were figuring stuff out, I'm sure I ran queries that scanned the entire dataset accidentally. I imagine one of those queries would have cost at least 1k to run. Our entire setup cost less than 10k a month to run on AWS regardless of how many queries we ran. I can't imagine spending 40k on 14gb of data regardless of what you were doing.
So this product is not only expensive, but I have to think of the execution plan myself? Or I am wrong and modern dbs don't do that?
Query 1 -> join Table A with Table B, both have 1M records
Query 2 -> Filter Table A to 10k records, then join Table A with Table B (1M records)
I would expect Query 2 to execute faster - I don't think the exec plan would've optimized Query 1 equivalently.
"If my product had 10,000 daily active users generating 100 events per day, I’d easily hit that size in less than a year ... If I built an application to visualize this result and refreshed it every second, I would spend $40,340.16/day on Tinybird’s Pro-plan"
There is no plausible business sense in refreshing the display of a year's worth of data every second, and even scaling back to a likely still-unreasonably-frequent refresh rate of once per hour you're down to just $11/day.
What? Even if I used SQLite on my laptop and queried this thing every second, I'd still use <$3 a day. Also, this platform has no concept of caching? Don't understand this post at all, total clickbait based on an inefficiency in your platform you really shouldn't be advertising.
I try to never underestimate the potential for someone to do something really stupid and I'm sure there are some egregious examples out there where a DB was set up and run such that outrageous charges resulted; but has anyone seen a situation in real life anywhere close to this kind of example?
Even if there was a instance where a poorly designed and implemented data set caused a $40K charge for a single day; I wonder how long it would take for the bean counters to notice and take action?
Learn from history, specifically, SQL. Or people who think they are too important to learn SQL aren't that important after all
