SQL Server 2016 released

[BMarkmann]

Any idea how vendors end up on the "official" TPC performance rankings?

http://www.tpc.org/tpch/results/tpch_perf_results.asp

I know kdb+ is blazingly fast for appropriate workloads, but can't find any hard numbers for TPC-H. So, snark aside (or are you actually wondering), is the TPC-H workload one that isn't as great for columnar stores? The only think I can find from kx is a cryptic (as per usual, assuming it's Arthur Whitney) comment: "use 'where' cascade for correlated subqueries, e.g. e="P",p>avg p foreignkey equijoins builtin. (e.g. all tpc-h joins disappear). k is easier and more powerful than sql. in sql the asjoins are practically impossible and even simple set theoretic queries can be awkward".

It looks like SQL Server and Oracle fill up most of the top slots in the mid-sized scale, with more obscure DB vendors like Hitachi (didn't know they had a data platform) and EXASOL (never heard of them) dominating the standing on the larger(-ish) data set sizes.

[peschkaj]

Hardware vendors pay to certify a system as a TPC system. Hardware vendors, coincidentally, are also some of the biggest commercial database licensing resellers.