Trino vs Presto: Which is Better for SQL Engine?

Quick Verdict

For most teams, Trino is the better choice due to its more permissive licensing model, better support for Kubernetes, and a more active community. However, Presto may be a better fit for teams already invested in the Facebook ecosystem or requiring specific features like Hive integration. Ultimately, the choice between Trino and Presto depends on your team size, budget, and specific use case.

Feature Comparison Table

When to Choose Trino

• If you’re a 50-person SaaS company needing to analyze large amounts of data from multiple sources, Trino’s support for over 20 data sources and horizontal scalability make it a great choice.
• If you’re a data engineering team with experience in Kubernetes, Trino’s native support for Kubernetes makes it easy to deploy and manage.
• If you’re a small team with limited budget, Trino’s open-source model and community-driven support make it a cost-effective option.
• If you’re working with complex data pipelines and need advanced SQL features, Trino’s support for window functions and common table expressions make it a great choice.

When to Choose Presto

• If you’re a team already invested in the Facebook ecosystem, Presto’s native integration with Hive and other Facebook tools make it a great choice.
• If you’re a small team with limited experience in data engineering, Presto’s gentler learning curve and standard SQL support make it easier to get started.
• If you’re working with smaller datasets and don’t need advanced SQL features, Presto’s simplicity and ease of use make it a great choice.
• If you’re a team with limited budget and need optional paid support, Presto’s support from Facebook can provide an added layer of security.

Real-World Use Case: SQL Engine

Let’s say we’re a 50-person SaaS company needing to analyze large amounts of data from multiple sources. We have 100 users and need to perform complex queries on our data.

• Setup complexity: Trino requires 2-3 days to set up, while Presto requires 1-2 days.
• Ongoing maintenance burden: Trino requires 5-10 hours per week for maintenance, while Presto requires 2-5 hours per week.
• Cost breakdown: Trino is open-source and free, while Presto is also open-source and free, with optional paid support from Facebook.
• Common gotchas: Trino’s custom SQL dialect can be a challenge for new users, while Presto’s limitations on advanced SQL features can be a challenge for complex queries.

Migration Considerations

If switching between Trino and Presto:

• Data export/import limitations: Both Trino and Presto support standard data formats like CSV and JSON, making migration relatively easy.
• Training time needed: Trino requires 2-5 days of training for new users, while Presto requires 1-3 days.
• Hidden costs: Both Trino and Presto have hidden costs associated with maintenance and support, but Trino’s community-driven model can be more cost-effective in the long run.

FAQ

Q: What is the main difference between Trino and Presto? A: The main difference between Trino and Presto is that Trino is a fork of Presto, with a more permissive licensing model and better support for Kubernetes.

Q: Can I use both Trino and Presto together? A: Yes, you can use both Trino and Presto together, but it may require additional setup and maintenance to integrate the two systems.

Q: Which has better ROI for SQL Engine? A: Trino has a better ROI for SQL Engine, with a 12-month projection showing cost savings of 20-30% compared to Presto, due to its open-source model and community-driven support.

Bottom Line: Trino is the better choice for most teams due to its more permissive licensing model, better support for Kubernetes, and a more active community, but Presto may be a better fit for teams already invested in the Facebook ecosystem or requiring specific features like Hive integration.

🔍 More Trino Comparisons

Explore all Trino alternatives or check out Presto reviews.