There is nothing bad about it (other than the price). It just seems an outrageous claim that MemSQL, with all its constraints, is even in the same game.
At the least they should come up with some seriously impressive benchmarks before dropping names like that.
I have had the misfortune of working with Q. It's a very clever little language that could be a great platform for numerical prototyping. Unfortunately, it's hobbled by a terrible programming culture. The interpreter gives cryptic single-character error messages and the C interface is written in a nightmarish soup of macros.
http://kx.com/faq.php seems pretty clear that kdb is multi-threaded.
"Does kdb+ support multiple cores and/or multi-threading?
Yes, both are built right in to the system and this makes kdb+ extraordinarily fast when compared with traditional applications, as it can make full use of all available cores. "
Anyway, why is there not a single benchmark available to support the sales-pitch?
(In your favor I'll just pretend you didn't mention kdb here...)