Waiting for the comments about the name.
On a more serious note, looking forward to trying this new release out. I found previous versions really straightforward to get up and running with on Kubernetes but performance was always lacklustre.
On a more serious note, looking forward to trying this new release out. I found previous versions really straightforward to get up and running with on Kubernetes but performance was always lacklustre.
The sysbench metrics seems like a much fairer comparison, and CockroachDB looks great in those metrics as well, so I don't really get why you are leading with a comparison that looks really sketchy at first glance.
We also hear your point about efficiency as tpmC (throughput) alone isn't sufficient to compare systems without taking hardware into account. TPC-C asks users to provide a tpmC per dollar amount. We conducted this price comparison previously in this blog post https://www.cockroachlabs.com/blog/cockroachdb-2dot1-perform.... These results are even lower in 19.2 because we can achieve greater tpmC with fewer nodes.
This page wasn't met to be competitive-we simply showed Aurora as a reference point. Since we want to focus on CockroachDB we will remove the Aurora comparison.
Others have commented about how the language that CockroachDB was written in causes performance issues due to Go using a GC. Can't say that this is the main reason for sure, but I guess it could be a possibility.