Here is another example: https://datastudio.google.com/u/0/reporting/6a2c38d4-3a22-41... - startup times for serverless engines. Note: DuckDB is not present in this comparison, I'm not sure why.
Both comparisons are independent.
I know a few cases when clickhouse-local is worse than DuckDB:
- it does not use the embedded metadata to filter while processing Parquet files;
- the syntax for accessing the files in s3 is clunkier in clickhouse-local;
- finally, there is no Python module and integration with dataframes.
I know many cases when clickhouse-local is better than DuckDB. Performance is mostly better, because ClickHouse is more advanced in the query engine. DuckDB mostly keeping up, but sometimes is already ahead, in some scenarios. Query language, data types support, feature completeness, stability and testing - much better in ClickHouse.
I did not make uncharitable comments about DuckDB. We have recently met with Hannes Mühleisen and the team from DuckDB labs, and I have very good impression about the technology and the team. I see them as our friends. I'm also enthusiastic about every data processing technologies.