[atanasovskib]

There are a lot of differences that need to be taken into account before making a comparison.

1. TimescaleDB implements the compression on a hifher level, the underlying table storage/access method remains the same

2. TimescaleDB doesn't compress latest data, allowing you to keep fast writes and edits for recent data, but also allows you to benefit from compression on row based data

3. Although not currently available, it is possible to have a TimescaleDB hypertable with a column based access method

4. Comparing would have to take into account the data model, access methods (types of queries), ingestion vs query comparison (batch vs real time), backfilling and editing, etc

I agree that this (Columnar) would be closer to Parquet.