Comments on: Dividing the data warehousing work among MPP nodes

By: Exadata and Oracle Database Machine parallelization clarified | DBMS2 -- DataBase Management System Services

Thu, 03 Sep 2009 13:57:42 +0000

[...] they are similarly-named HP servers using identical Intel chips. I.e., Oracle has moved into the node heterogeneity camp. By way of contrast, the usual-suspect MPP vendors — Teradata, Netezza, Greenplum, [...]

By: Infology.Ru » Blog Archive » Разделение нагрузки между узлами MPP-систем хранилищ данных

Thu, 02 Oct 2008 04:40:13 +0000

[...] Автор: Curt Monash Дата публикации оригинала: 2008-09-05 Перевод: Олег Кузьменко Источник: Блог Курта Монаша [...]

By: Oracle Exadata and Oracle data warehouse appliance sound bites | DBMS2 -- DataBase Management System Services

Mon, 29 Sep 2008 13:19:37 +0000

[...] Oracle’s idea of splitting database processing between a couple of types of server is a smart one, and is consistent with what multiple other vendors are doing. [...]

By: Infology.Ru » Blog Archive » Exadata: Oracle наконец отвечает бросившим вызов в области хранилищ данных

Fri, 26 Sep 2008 04:21:21 +0000

[...] Dividing the data warehousing work among MPP nodes [...]

By: Exadata: Oracle finally answers the data warehouse challengers | DBMS2 -- DataBase Management System Services

Thu, 25 Sep 2008 00:02:28 +0000

[...] Dividing the data warehousing work among MPP nodes [...]

By: Introduction to Aster Data and nCluster | DBMS2 -- DataBase Management System Services

Fri, 19 Sep 2008 08:19:50 +0000

[...] are more parts of the Aster Data story I want to write about, namely node heterogeneity and MapReduce syntax, but for now I’ll stop here and post this. I’d also like to point [...]

By: Log Buffer #114: A Carnival of the Vanities for DBAs

Log Buffer #114: A Carnival of the Vanities for DBAs — Fri, 12 Sep 2008 18:23:48 +0000

[...] 10.0 – Dividing the data warehousing work among MPP nodes Fri, Sep 5, 2008 8:48 AM I talk with lots of vendors of MPP data warehouse DBMS. I’ ve now heard enough different approaches to MPP architecture that I think it might be interesting to contrast some of the alternatives. The base-case MPP DBMS architecture is one in which there are two kinds of nodes: A boss node, whose jobs include: Receiving and parsing […] [...]

By: Anon

Anon — Sat, 06 Sep 2008 08:59:35 +0000

Didn’t mean to shill, didn’t consider the competitive nature, apologies.

However – I think we’d all like a bit of auditing of the customers reported by all of these vendors. Easy enough for public companies like Teradata and Netezza, not so easy for these others.

Two approaches to the market – you can be like MySQL and get tens of thousands of customers for $1,000 each or you can get tens of customers for $1,000,000 each. Netezza fits into the latter, I/we don’t know where these others fit.

By: Curt Monash

Curt Monash — Sat, 06 Sep 2008 08:41:45 +0000

To answer your questions more directly about Vertica, I’m aware, by name (largely NDAed, of course, as most customer names I get from vendors are), of as many repeat customers at Vertica as at any other of the analytic DBMS startups (except, of course, Netezza). Since they’ve been selling product for a much shorter time than, say, Greenplum (a vendor with a comparable number of overall sales), that’s a nice proof point.

Let me hasten to point out, however, that I don’t take the time to review every customer for every vendor in detail. Not even close.

CAM

By: Curt Monash

Curt Monash — Sat, 06 Sep 2008 08:37:03 +0000

I think you’re abusing anonymity a bit. If you want to shill for one of my competitors, please do so in a different venue.

While I make the occasional mistake, I’m proud of the care I put into my research. I’m sure the Gartner folks feel the same way about theirs. I agree with some of their conclusions, but disagree with others; necessarily, the same is true in reverse.

Let’s leave it at that.

CAM