For this, I create a small Python script to prevent myself from copy & paste trauma.
import os
import sys
def Generate_File(pNumber):
iNumber = 0
pathname = os.path.dirname(sys.argv[0])
pathname = os.path.abspath(pathname) + "\HANA_File.txt"
myfile = open(pathname, "a")
while iNumber < pNumber:
iNumber += 1
myfile.write("insert into HANA_File values (" + str(iNumber) +
",'Test Line');\n")
myfile.close()
print 'The file ' + pathname + ' was written successfully'
Generate_File(1000)
When run, this small program will generate 1000 records.
And the table structure for both SAP HANA and MySQL would as simple as:
Id --> Integer
Text --> Varchar(10)
Let's start with MySQL...
MySQL doesn't give us the total amount of time spend, but we can assume about 3 minutes...
Let's move to SAP HANA...
SAP HANA gives us the total amount of time spend, which was 1:18.484 minutes
So we can deduct that SAP HANA was 60% faster than MySQL...and for sure, that's not the best way to load records on SAP HANA...but even like this, you can see how fast SAP HANA really is...
Greetings,
Blag.


Hello Blag. It would be interesting if you could add one additional step plus one additional variance to your test:
ResponderEliminar1. You need to add to load into HANA db: UPDATE «table» MERGE DELTA INDEX;
2. Have a variance where the second column has unique value in each record of the second column.
Thanks,
-Vitaliy
i think that if you retry this test using PostgreSQL you could have another surprises ;)
ResponderEliminari think that if you retry this test using PostgreSQL you could have another surprises ;)
ResponderEliminarVitaliy and However else wrote a comment:
ResponderEliminarI will publish tomorrow a new post with your suggestions -;)
Greetings,
Blag.