In addition to my previously posted thoughts on the Oracle Exadata/data warehouse appliance announcement, let me offer some more concise observations.
- Microsoft had leapfrogged Oracle with its DATAllegro acquisition. Now Oracle’s back in the game.
- But Oracle Exadata Release 1 is hardly going to put Teradata, Netezza, or Greenplum out of business.
- After long denying it, Oracle has finally admitted that putting more than 10 TB on Oracle had been an extremely painful thing to do.
- 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.
- Medium-long term, the Exadata technical strategy could work very well. Exadata storage management addresses some of the problems with shared-everything; Oracle RAC addresses other; and it may not take many releases before Oracle gets query parallelization right as well. Edit: This point is superseded by my updated take on Oracle query parallelization.
- Now Oracle and Microsoft are both supporting Infiniband for high end data warehousing.
- Oracle’s Exadata-based appliance doesn’t have the out-of-the-box simplicity that other appliances and analytic DBMS do.
- Licensing details aren’t yet clear, but Oracle Exadata’s list price probably won’t be terribly appealing either. Of course, nobody in their right mind pays Oracle list prices anyway.
- New web-based businesses have no reason to buy the Oracle data warehouse appliance. Exadata makes sense only for established enterprises.
Contradicting all that potential goodness, Oracle has been making ringing anti-shared-nothing statements, such as the silly:
There are “speed-of-light issues” associated with … scale-out-style grids
That mindset doesn’t auger well for Oracle to ever be a fully competitive high-end data warehouse DBMS vendor.