Comments on: Why Oracle and Microsoft will lose in VLDB data warehousing http://www.dbms2.com/2007/03/06/why-oracle-and-microsoft-will-lose-in-vldb-data-warehousing/ Choices in data management and analysis Fri, 16 May 2008 18:47:07 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5 By: Regclean http://www.dbms2.com/2007/03/06/why-oracle-and-microsoft-will-lose-in-vldb-data-warehousing/#comment-67003 Regclean Mon, 07 Jan 2008 03:31:30 +0000 http://www.dbms2.com/2007/03/06/why-oracle-and-microsoft-will-lose-in-vldb-data-warehousing/#comment-67003 > Seriously — do you think I’m overstating the case? I'd say that is a fair representation. > Seriously — do you think I’m overstating the case?

I’d say that is a fair representation.

]]> By: DBMS2 — DataBase Management System Services»Blog Archive » Deal prospects for data warehouse DBMS vendors http://www.dbms2.com/2007/03/06/why-oracle-and-microsoft-will-lose-in-vldb-data-warehousing/#comment-24975 DBMS2 — DataBase Management System Services»Blog Archive » Deal prospects for data warehouse DBMS vendors Wed, 11 Apr 2007 14:02:45 +0000 http://www.dbms2.com/2007/03/06/why-oracle-and-microsoft-will-lose-in-vldb-data-warehousing/#comment-24975 [...] Oracle needs to buy somebody, because of its rather dire product problems at the data warehouse high end. And it’s very much in keeping with their recent behavior to do so. [...] […] Oracle needs to buy somebody, because of its rather dire product problems at the data warehouse high end. And it’s very much in keeping with their recent behavior to do so. […]

]]> By: Oracle Errors http://www.dbms2.com/2007/03/06/why-oracle-and-microsoft-will-lose-in-vldb-data-warehousing/#comment-21719 Oracle Errors Wed, 14 Mar 2007 11:23:01 +0000 http://www.dbms2.com/2007/03/06/why-oracle-and-microsoft-will-lose-in-vldb-data-warehousing/#comment-21719 CAM, I think that you have rights. CAM,

I think that you have rights.

]]> By: DBMS2 — DataBase Management System Services»Blog Archive » Greenplum’s strategy http://www.dbms2.com/2007/03/06/why-oracle-and-microsoft-will-lose-in-vldb-data-warehousing/#comment-21667 DBMS2 — DataBase Management System Services»Blog Archive » Greenplum’s strategy Tue, 13 Mar 2007 23:07:15 +0000 http://www.dbms2.com/2007/03/06/why-oracle-and-microsoft-will-lose-in-vldb-data-warehousing/#comment-21667 [...] Greenplum rewrote a lot of PostgreSQL to parallelize it, in the correct belief that MPP is the best way to go for high-end data warehousing. [...] […] Greenplum rewrote a lot of PostgreSQL to parallelize it, in the correct belief that MPP is the best way to go for high-end data warehousing. […]

]]> By: Curt Monash http://www.dbms2.com/2007/03/06/why-oracle-and-microsoft-will-lose-in-vldb-data-warehousing/#comment-20803 Curt Monash Tue, 06 Mar 2007 17:41:43 +0000 http://www.dbms2.com/2007/03/06/why-oracle-and-microsoft-will-lose-in-vldb-data-warehousing/#comment-20803 I'd say there's a rough 2:1 ratio between how long Teradata has been around and how long DB2 for open systems has been around. I'd say there's also a rough 2:1 ratio for how long each one has been important. :) Seriously -- do you think I'm overstating the case? Best, CAM I’d say there’s a rough 2:1 ratio between how long Teradata has been around and how long DB2 for open systems has been around. I’d say there’s also a rough 2:1 ratio for how long each one has been important. :)

Seriously — do you think I’m overstating the case?

Best,

CAM

]]> By: Haider R http://www.dbms2.com/2007/03/06/why-oracle-and-microsoft-will-lose-in-vldb-data-warehousing/#comment-20797 Haider R Tue, 06 Mar 2007 16:56:06 +0000 http://www.dbms2.com/2007/03/06/why-oracle-and-microsoft-will-lose-in-vldb-data-warehousing/#comment-20797 Curt, good writeup on the pros / cons of the parallel database architectures. One comment about your footnote: **Historically speaking, of course. IBM, Netezza, and DATAllegro are now important MPP players too ..... IBM has been an MPP player for a long time with their shared-nothing parallel database (DB2) on the AIX/Unix front. Curt, good writeup on the pros / cons of the parallel database architectures. One comment about your footnote:

**Historically speaking, of course. IBM, Netezza, and DATAllegro are now important MPP players too …..

IBM has been an MPP player for a long time with their shared-nothing parallel database (DB2) on the AIX/Unix front.

]]>