Emulation, transparency, portability
Analysis of products that support the emulation of market-leading database management systems. Related subjects include:
EnterpriseDB is making a series of moves and announcements. Highlights include:
- Renaming/repositioning the product as “Postgres Plus.” The free product is now Postgres Plus, while the version you pay EnterpriseDB for is now Postgres Plus Advanced Server.
- Repackaging the products, so that Postgres Plus Advanced Server is a strict superset of Postgres Plus.
- New features added to Postgres Plus Advanced Server.
- Features newly migrated from Advanced Server down to Postgres Plus.
- A strategic investment by IBM.
- Stressing Postgres in EnterpriseDB marketing, and dropping the tag-line defining themselves as “the Oracle-compatible database company.”
So far as I can tell, most of the technical differences between Advanced Server and regular Postgres Plus lie in three areas: Read more
|Categories: Cache, Emulation, transparency, portability, EnterpriseDB and Postgres Plus, Mid-range, MySQL, OLTP, Open source, PostgreSQL||1 Comment|
I had a catch-up phone meeting with Dataupia, since I hadn’t spoke with the company since the middle of last year. Like several other companies in the data warehouse specialist market, Dataupia can be annoyingly secretive. On the plus side – and this is very refreshing — Dataupia doesn’t seem to expect credit for accomplishments beyond those they’re willing to provide actual evidence for.
What I’ve gleaned about Dataupia’s customer activity to date amounts to: Read more
|Categories: Analytic technologies, Data warehouse appliances, Data warehousing, Dataupia, Emulation, transparency, portability||1 Comment|
I previously wrote that EnterpriseDB-on-Elastra has very little enterprise traction, drawing most of its interest instead from online businesses or ISVs. Having used that as a starting point in a recent chat with EnterpriseDB marketing chief Derek Rodner, I can now add that overall:
- EnterpriseDB reports good traction with ISVs. In particular, those that resell Oracle would like a cheaper alternative. Sometimes, they can port their code with no rewriting at all.
- Online businesses of various kinds also are a significant fraction of the customer base.
- EnterpriseDB has some true large-enterprise customers — Derek rattled off some household names — but this isn’t yet the heart of its business.
- EnterpriseDB has an increasing business teleselling to SMBs.
|Categories: Emulation, transparency, portability, EnterpriseDB and Postgres Plus, Mid-range||Leave a Comment|
I recently caught up with ParAccel’s CTO Barry Zane and Marketing VP Kim Stanick for a long technical discussion, which they have graciously continued by email. It would be impolitic in the extreme to comment on what led up to that. Let’s just note that many things I’ve previously written about ParAccel are now inoperative, and go straight to the highlights.
|Categories: Columnar database management, Data warehousing, Emulation, transparency, portability, Microsoft and SQL*Server, ParAccel||5 Comments|
Quite a bit of DBMS plug-compatibility is being claimed these days. Lewis Cunningham’s post on a few new EnterpriseDB features illustrates just how picky compatibility features can get. One can run Oracle code but not get around to handling comments properly? Sheesh.
|Categories: Emulation, transparency, portability, EnterpriseDB and Postgres Plus, Oracle||Leave a Comment|
Please do not rely on the parts of this post that draw a distinction between in-memory and disk-based operation. See our February 18, 2008 post about ParAccel instead. It turns out that communication with ParAccel was yet worse than I had realized.
Officially launched today at the TDWI conference, ParAccel is out to compete with Netezza. Right out of the chute, ParAccel may have surpassed Netezza in at least one area: pointlessly annoying secrecy. (In other regards I love them dearly, but that paranoia can be a real pain.) As best I can remember, here are some things about ParAccel that I both am allowed to say and find interesting:
- ParAccel offers a columnar, MPP data warehouse DBMS, called the ParAccel Analytic Database.
- ParAccel’s product runs in two main modes. “Maverick” is normal, stand-alone mode. “Amigo” mode amounts to a plug-compatible accelerator for Oracle or Microsoft SQL*Server. Early sales and marketing were concentrated on SQL*Server Amigo mode.
- ParAccel’s product also runs in another pair of modes – in-memory and disk-based. Early sales and marketing were concentrated on in-memory mode. Hybrid memory-centric processing sounds like something for a future release.
- Sun has a reseller partnership with ParAccel, focused on in-memory mode.
- Sun and ParAccel published record-shattering 100 gigabyte, 300 gigabyte, and 1 terabyte TPC-H benchmarks today, based on in-memory mode. (If you’d like to throw 13 terabytes of disk at 1 terabyte of user data, running simple and repetitive queries, that benchmark might be a useful guide to your own experience. But hey – that’s a big improvement on the prior champion, who used 40 terabytes of disk. To ParAccel’s credit, they’re not pretending that this is a bigger deal than it is.)
|Categories: Analytic technologies, Columnar database management, Data warehouse appliances, Data warehousing, Emulation, transparency, portability, Microsoft and SQL*Server, Oracle, ParAccel||1 Comment|
I’m doing another webinar on mid-range OLTP DBMS next Tuesday, at 12 noon Eastern. It’s sponsored by EnterpriseDB, who also sponsored one six months ago on the same subject. Hopefully, this one will be a bit fresher. Sign up today! The expected turnout is humongous.
|Categories: Emulation, transparency, portability, EnterpriseDB and Postgres Plus, Mid-range, OLTP||Leave a Comment|
I’ve been arguing for a while that Oracle and Microsoft are screwed in high-end data warehousing. The reason is that they’re stuck with SMP (Symmetric Multi-Processing) architectures, while Teradata, Netezza, DATAllegro, and many others enjoy the benefits of MPP (Massively Parallel Processing). Thus, Teradata and DATAllegro boast installations in the hundreds of terabytes each, while Oracle and Microsoft users usually have to perform unnatural acts of hard-coded partitioning even to reach the 10 terabyte level.
That said, there are at least three ways Oracle and/or Microsoft could get out of this technical box:
1. They could buy or just partner with MPP vendors such as Dataupia, who offer plug-compatibility with their respective main DBMS.
2. They could buy whoever they want, plug-compatibility be damned. Presumably, they’d quickly add a light-weight data federation front-end to give the appearance of integration, then merge the products more closely over time.
3. They could develop or buy technology like DATAllegro’s, which essentially federates instances of an ordinary SMP DBMS across nodes of an MPP grid (Greenplum does something similar). I imagine that, for example, ripping Ingres out of DATAllegro and slotting in Oracle instead would be a pretty straightforward exercise; even without dramatic change to any of the optimizations, the resulting port would be something that ran pretty quickly on Day 1.
Bottom line: Oracle and Microsoft are hemorrhaging at the data warehouse high end now. But there are ways they could stanch the bleeding.
|Categories: Analytic technologies, Data warehouse appliances, Data warehousing, DATAllegro, Dataupia, Emulation, transparency, portability, Greenplum, Microsoft and SQL*Server, Oracle, Teradata||4 Comments|
Calpont’s website is finally more or less real. It still doesn’t say much except that the company is in alpha test with a Type II appliance, and that the product has a columnar DBMS architecture and Oracle transparency (with DB2) promised. Oh yes; it has 32 employees. The “Customer” tab doesn’t list any customers, but I guess they saved site design money by having it all ready to go when that situation changes.
Philip Howard’s recent article has a lot more meat than that, including the perplexing bit of info that Calpont is starting out with a shared-everything architecture. Based on that, as well as the company’s prior technical efforts, we can probably conclude they’re focused on rather small warehouses.
|Categories: Analytic technologies, Calpont, Data warehouse appliances, Data warehousing, Emulation, transparency, portability||Leave a Comment|
Pervasive Software has a long history – 25 years, in fact, as they’re emphasizing in some current marketing. Ownership and company name have changed a few times, as the company went from being an independent startup to being owned by Novell to being independent again. The original product, and still the cash cow, was a linked-list DBMS called Btrieve, eventually renamed Pervasive PSQL as it gained more and more relational functionality.
Pervasive Summit PSQL v10 has just been rolled out, and I wrote a nice little white paper to commemorate the event, describing some of the main advances over v9, primarily for the benefit of current Pervasive PSQL developers. In one major advance, Pervasive made the SQL functionality much stronger. In particular, you now can have a regular SQL data dictionary, so that the database can be used for other purposes – BI, additional apps, whatever. Apparently, that wasn’t possible before, although it had been possible in yet earlier releases. Pervasive also added view-based security permissions, which is obviously a Very Good Thing.
There also are some big performance boosts. Read more
|Categories: Cache, Data models and architecture, Database compression, Emulation, transparency, portability, Memory-centric data management, Microsoft and SQL*Server, Mid-range, OLTP, Pervasive Software||Leave a Comment|