Progress Software progress report
For the past 20+ years – all the way back to when it was still privately held — I’ve periodically gotten up to speed on Progress Software. I’m trying again now, and to that end dropped by yesterday for a chat with Jeff Stamen. I’ll give a brief overview now – which is probably all I’m qualified to do right now anyway – and then loop back with more detailed info after I get it.
After a reorganization at the beginning of this (November) fiscal year, the vast majority of Progress’ products fall into one of five buckets, which I shall glibly refer to in decreasing order of size as “Progress Classic,” “SOA,” “drivers,” “memory-centric,” and “EasyAsk.” Here’s a quick overview of each. Read more
| Categories: Companies and products, Mid-range, Object, OLTP, Progress, Apama, and DataDirect | 3 Comments |
More on Cast Iron Systems
I chatted again recently with Simon Peel of Cast Iron Systems, and this time I got a better understanding of Cast Iron’s simplicity claim. It refers largely to a drag-and-drop interface that furthermore provides default mappings between pairs of application suites. Simon bristled a bit when I referred to this as mapping “like to like,” because he’s proud that it’s a little smarter than that. Still, “like to like” seems to be what it typically amounts to — customers go to customers, customer addresses go to customer addresses, and so on. Read more
MySQL/IBM — will everybody please calm down?
Reuters wrote a really stupid article on the MySQL/IBM deal, and some bloggers have gotten over-excited as well. Even the not-ignorant among these seem to be overlooking one or more of the following points:
- The IBM/MySQL deal is just for the iSeries.
- The iSeries is the successor to the AS/400 and System 38, and thus is in a decades-old family of machines that have some weirdnesses in their DBMS support.
- In particular, DB2 on the iSeries isn’t the same thing as DB2 on other boxes, although multiple DB2s do at least nominally run there.
So while it’s interesting and nice, this deal isn’t that relevant to IBM’s mainstream software business at all.
Read more
| Categories: IBM and DB2, Mid-range, MySQL, OLTP, Open source | 4 Comments |
The big ANTs secret is officially out
ANTs has now put out a press release saying what was already obvious — the company is offering middleware to run applications written for one DBMS over another backend instead. The ANTs folks fondly think their own engine is just as good as anybody else’s, but realistically customers prefer name-brand DBMS for persistent storage, so that’s what they’re offering.
Read more
And then there is FileMaker
Chris Kubica of Application Architects, LLC is a big FileMaker fan. And there are of course reviews and articles that agree with him, although when FileMaker sponsored this white paper they did not choose an author famed for the independence of his analysis.
So should FileMaker be included on my list of midrange OLTP DBMS or not?
| Categories: FileMaker | 20 Comments |
Free webinar on midrange OLTP/multipurpose DBMS, sponsored by EnterpriseDB
At noon Eastern Time on Wednesday, April 25, I’ll be doing a webinar about midrange OLTP/multipurpose DBMS, sponsored by EnterpriseDB, who not coincidentally are purveyors of same. You can sign up here.
Below is some of EnterpriseDB’s verbiage promoting the event. I particularly like the part where they refer to me as a “renowned industry guru.” 😉
The DBMS market, once thought to be an oligopoly, is experiencing some refreshing disruption – thanks to open source-based databases that are proving viable alternatives to traditional, more costly incumbents. Whether you’re trying to control database costs or support new application development, there’s never been a better time to reevaluate your database platform strategy.
But, how can you realistically compare alternatives like MySQL and EnterpriseDB against established database platforms like Oracle, DB2, and SQL Server?
Let your applications be your guide.
In this webcast, renowned industry guru Curt Monash provides an objective context in which to evaluate and select the right DBMS based on your application’s needs. He’ll discuss how all DBMS’ features are not all created equal in the way they address application-specific demands. Particular focus will be given to the unique requirements of transaction-intensive applications.
Join us for this eSeminar and learn how to:
- Go beyond the typical feature checklists of self-proclaimed “enterprise-class” offerings to provide a more in-depth barometer of a DBMS’ true capabilities
- Define the DBMS platform requirements for a variety of transaction-intensive applications
- Delineate between must-have and nice-to-have DBMS features for your application
| Categories: EnterpriseDB and Postgres Plus, Mid-range, OLTP | 2 Comments |
SolidDB and MySQL 5.0 – how industrial-strength in OLTP?
MySQL 4.0 is an OLTP joke. MySQL 5.0, however, shows a lot of progress in terms of real transactions, foreign keys, referential integrity, triggers, stored procedures and so on. In anticipation of the MySQL user conference next week, I got a quick briefing from Paola Lubet and Murat Demiroglu at Solid Information Technology, whose SolidDB is one of the two transactional storage engines for MySQL (the other is InnoDB, now owned by Oracle).
The layer provided by MySQL actually does most of what I think of as “language processing” – parsing, optimization, drivers, triggers, stored procedures, referential integrity, etc. SolidDB is a storage engine providing actual execution. Its features and virtues include:
• Online backup. (Note: Apparently, the extra-cost InnoDB online backup product isn’t showing up on price lists these days.)
• Optimistic (as well as pessimistic) concurrency control. This can be a good performance feature for applications that have a whole lot of Adds and very few Changes.
• General reliability. Unless they really botched the port, Solid benefits from a long history of very reliable operation.
• High availability. Scheduled for alpha in early summer and beta in the fall is a high-availability option. This initial-release will be master-slave synchronous replication. More sophisticated replication could come later on, as could memory-centric performance, if market conditions seem to warrant it (I’m betting they will).
| Categories: Mid-range, MySQL, OLTP, Open source, solidDB | 2 Comments |
Naming the DBMS disruptors
Edit: This post has largely been superseded by this more recent one defining mid-range relational DBMS.
I find myself defining a new product category – midrange OLTP/multipurpose DBMS. (Or just midrange DBMS for brevity.) Nothing earthshaking here; I’m simply referring to those products that: Read more
Comments are fine again, and my email should be better too.
The site move went fine, for the most part. Everything’s at the new host. Please comment away.
Even better, my email addresses at dbms2.com and monash.com (both firstnamelastname, and I check them both) are now with different hosts. The chance of a simulataneous outage is much reduced.
| Categories: About this blog | 1 Comment |
This is not a good time to post a comment on DBMS2
The blog is being moved from one hosting provider to another. Comments made today might get lost in the transition. The weekend won’t be so hot either. After that it should be fine.
| Categories: About this blog | Leave a Comment |