Thanks for the comments. I (not the author, but a co-worker) mentioned in another comment that we are working on more benchmarks that we hope to share soon, particularly in regards to read performance. We've seen some impressive speed-ups for aggregates grouped by time intervals, but we're still a bit early in our tuning on the query optimizations to give out more numbers. Again, hopefully in the next few weeks.

Space requirements can admittedly be a bit higher than some other time-series databases or column stores. Since disk is cheaper than memory, and with easy ways of doing retention, we think its a worthwhile trade-off for people for now. But compression is something we will look to down the road. For our later benchmarks we will include memory/space comparisions to help people evaluate.

As for node splitting, our clustering solution (not yet released) is being worked on quite a bit as well. When its closer to being ready we'll include our thoughts on how to best manage your partitions.