Comments on: Greenplum is going hybrid columnar as well

By: Appregatta Blog » 2010: The Year of Business Intelligence

Appregatta Blog » 2010: The Year of Business Intelligence — Thu, 10 Dec 2009 10:08:32 +0000

[...] Data, and the like with significant innovations in in-memory processing, exploiting parallelism, columnar storage options, and more. Additionally, significant opportunities to push application processing into [...]

By: The Top 10 Trends for 2010 in Analytics, Business Intelligence, and Performance Management « Enterprise Information Management

Thu, 03 Dec 2009 09:16:10 +0000

[...] Data, and the like with significant innovations in in-memory processing, exploiting parallelism, columnar storage options, and more. We already starting to see hybrid approaches between the Hadoop players and [...]

By: Paul Johnson

Paul Johnson — Thu, 15 Oct 2009 19:52:48 +0000

Well done to Greenplum for offering more choice say I. A hybrid column/row capability is pretty cool.

We downloaded the new release a few days ago after Luke mentioned during a call that the new column stuff had been made available.

It’ll be interesting to see how it works once folks start beating on it.

By: Daniel Abadi

Daniel Abadi — Wed, 14 Oct 2009 18:53:47 +0000

Curt,

You pretty much predicted everything I was going to say, but nonetheless, my reactions can be found at:

http://dbmsmusings.blogspot.com/2009/10/greenplum-announces-column-oriented.html

By: Ben Werther

Ben Werther — Wed, 14 Oct 2009 17:35:01 +0000

DW Consultant —

- You’d have to agree that every vendor is building from a largely shared pool of ideas. Most of everything that every vendor does is covered in academic literature going back decades. Our goal isn’t being novel in everything we do — it is delivering value to customers.

- That being said, I think a little credit is due here. We’ve built a flexible enough storage infrastructure to allow us to (1) easily add a very efficient implementation of column-oriented tables, and (2) allow both row- and column-orientation to be used not just in the same database but in different partitions of the same table.

So why did we add this feature? It is about customer choice. For most analytical queries and mixed workloads – particularly with high-rate continuous microbatched loads – our row processing wins out over columnar approaches. (i.e. There are good reasons why the pure columnar guys aren’t winning mixed-workload EDW deals against Teradata like we are). But there are a lot of cases where columnar processing does great and does have an edge over row processing. Customers wanted the choice, so now we do both.

By: DW Consultant

DW Consultant — Wed, 14 Oct 2009 16:23:02 +0000

Nice write-up, Although it sounds like Greenplum loves to copy technology rather than innovating. Does this mean that they cannot perform as well as Columnar DBMS? Are they loosing business to Columnar Vendors?

By: Seth Grimes

Seth Grimes — Wed, 14 Oct 2009 10:59:17 +0000

Very helpful write-up!

By: Osma

Osma — Wed, 14 Oct 2009 06:18:31 +0000

Interesting — the append-only compressed row store sounds kind of like a compressed MySQL/MyISAM table though. I’m curious how they’ve approached indexing in the column store mechanism. Have you found any data on that?