Hi guys, although older post, still relevant. I mean dgraph benchmark is open source, so anyone can go and customize the benchmark neo4j configuration, so it performs best, but noone did it :-)
"we don't have the capacity to help other vendors with their benchmarks or teaching them about Neo4j basics" - this is especially what you should do when one is showing with open source data his solution does better. I wouldn't call it vendor benchmark as soon as it is fully open source and they welcome feedback. I think soon we will need something like http://www.tpc.org/tpch/ for graph databases, some standardized set of different type of graphs and common graph algorithms to be executed. On Wednesday, January 25, 2017 at 1:53:17 AM UTC+1, Michael Hunger wrote: > > The benchmark has several big flaws, and shouldn't be taken seriously at > least for the Neo4j side. > > Otherwise what Jim said on your GH issue: > > Jim Webber: I think vendor benchmarks aren't worth the paper they're >> written on. This one doesn't even distinguish between caching results >> (neo4j doesn't) and query plans (it certainly does). Their setup of neo4j >> is (deliberately?) naive too. On the whole, my position is that they need >> to prove themselves in the marketplace and not on their blog. > > > As you can probably imagine, we don't have the capacity to help other > vendors with their benchmarks or teaching them about Neo4j basics. > > Usually, we recommend that people interested in Neo4j take their own data > and model & import into the Neo4j property graph and run their own > use-cases against them. We're glad to help real projects to be successful > and happy with their Neo4j use, which seems to work very well so far. > > If you're interested in learning more about Neo4j feel free to join our > London user group and come to one of our frequent events. > > > Cheers, Michael > > On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 10:17 AM, Lazhar Ichir <he...@lazharichir.com > <javascript:>> wrote: > >> Just thought you guys would be interested into this benchmark of Neo4j >> versus Dgraph <https://open.dgraph.io/post/benchmark-neo4j/>: >> >> - Dgraph is 160x faster than Neo4j for loading graph data. >> - Dgraph consumes 5x lesser memory compared to Neo4j and is at least >> 3x faster for intertwined reads and writes. >> - For intertwined reads and writes, Dgraph is at least 3x to 6x >> faster. >> >> What do you guys think? >> >> L >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Neo4j" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to neo4j+un...@googlegroups.com <javascript:>. >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >> > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Neo4j" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to neo4j+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
