I am a bit torn with this, because while I love people reading and then writing up things, there are so many changes I think they should make but I don't want to just barge in and make pull requests.

E.g., they largely miss DryadLINQ (disclosure: not an author, but worked with them), which I would rate as the second most important paper after MapReduce in the "batch compute" space. It shows up only as what you should use to write Dryad programs, because Dryad's programming model "is less elegant than MapReduce"; harsh.

The streaming section (disclosure: Naiad co-author) dances around and then suggests that Google Dataflow is somehow a unification of previous work, which is .. well, you can read the Google Dataflow paper

    http://www.vldb.org/pvldb/vol8/p1792-Akidau.pdf

and do a search for "Naiad"; it's not even on their radar.

It feels a bit like the critiques are perhaps too-credulous readings of the related work sections of other papers.

I'm not sure a great way to get to a consensus understanding of the position of the works in the historical record, or whether it is even possible with sensitive authors (hi), but it would be cool to have. Any recommendations would be great.