ClickHouse Data Modeling for Postgres Users

In Postgresql, having an append only table like that and using a &quot;window&quot; for queries would lead to very bad performance as the whole table would have to be scanned for the window function to work. And that could be terrible when you have hundred of thousands of rows.<p>I&#x27;m wondering if the situation is different with clickhouse? Or if it is just that no one cares as your requests to clickhouse are supposed to be less frequent and so it is not a problem if the request takes several minutes to complete?

Love everything about CH. However, we were at wits end syncing things to it from postgres. Airbyte was a let down with no normalisation (they had it but removed it). Meltano was seamless but with no ui. However, we have had issues with it as well. Peerdb is a welcome addition - will give it a go soon.

&gt; `ORDER BY (enabled, ts, id) POPULATE AS` &gt; `SELECT * FROM peerdb.public_goals;`<p>With a materialized view like that, a simple &quot;final&quot; for deduplication won&#x27;t work anymore, right? And the other two deduplication methods will probably cause performance problems on large-ish tables.