February 16, 2006

MySQL disclaims interest in the ERP market

With Oracle acquiring first Innobase and now Sleepycat, MySQL has been under the gun to position itself more sharply. In response, their CEO reportedly disclaimed interest in the ERP market. That surprises me, as it contradicts what I hear from SAP, and have heard from the company in the past.

Frankly, if he even said what he’s quoted as being saying, I doubt he entirely meant it.

Anyhow, lots of MySQL reactions to the latest news may be found right on the Planet MySQL blog.

EDIT: Yeah, he didn’t mean it that way. See my Monash Report post for clarification.

February 5, 2006

Tom Kyte on constraints

I’ve put up some posts slamming what I regard as an absurdly extremist pro-constraints view held by some relational advocates. But Tom Kyte offers a more nuanced view of constraints that I find extremely reasonable.

The basic idea is this. Oracle has something called “non-validated constraints” — assertions that are true about the data but not enforced by the DBMS. Putting them in the database gives valuable information — metadata — to Oracle, allowing the optimizer to work much more efficiently. And there’s no performance overhead, because the constraints aren’t actually checked at run time.

As Tom correctly points out, this story assumes that you’ve indeed done a solid job of data cleaning. If not, the non-validation of the constraints could allow the system to give a wrong answer.

January 31, 2006

Computerworld on memory-centric data management

Computerworld recently ran an excellent story on memory-centric data management. The opening sentences show that correspondent Gary Anthes most definitely “gets it”:

Relational database management systems have become all but ubiquitous in enterprise computing since 1970, when they were first devised by E.F. Codd. But as powerful and flexible as those databases are, they’ve proved inadequate for a handful of ultrademanding applications that have to process hundreds or thousands of transactions per second and never go down.

I’m quoted in one of the sidebars, but with the core article being this good I didn’t really add much.

Incidentally, the article talked a lot about Oracle’s recently acquired TimesTen in-memory DBMS product, and also a fair amount about Streambase. This is complementary to my own research, which has focused more on the other leading memory-centric data management vendors.

January 31, 2006

DB2 Express-C

IBM announced the freeware version of DB2 today. I’ll post links to the details later, but I want to highlight a couple of interesting implications:

1. They define the cutoff between the free and paid version not by how big a database you can manage on disk, but rather by how much RAM the software can address. This supports my thesis that effective use of RAM is crucial to DBMS performance, and is corollary — specially optimized memory-centric data management products deserve a place in most large enterprises’ product portfolios.

2. Having a free version of DB2 lets one play with whatever features DB2 may have that simply aren’t available in other DBMS, to see if they’re worth using. And the most significant such feature, in my opinion, is native XML storage. Whatever else this product does or doesn’t accomplish, it may serve to speed adoption of IBM’s native XML server technology.

January 26, 2006

SAP, MaxDB, and MySQL, updated

I’ve had a chance to clarify and correct my understanding of the relationship between SAP, MaxDB, and MySQL. The story is this:

And by the way, MaxDB’s share in SAP’s user base is about the same as DB2’s (at least DB2 for open systems). MaxDB is being aggressively supported, and nobody should get any ideas to the contrary!

January 26, 2006

Progress DataDirect discovers XML

As a general rule, if you want DBMS drivers, your first call should be to Progress DataDirect. They’ve been the dominant vendor (under multiple names and ownerships) of both ODBC and JDBC drivers, essentially since those standards’ respective inventions. (Persistent Systems Private Ltd. — better known as PSPL — wouldn’t be a terrible choice for your second call).

DataDirect seems to have introduced XQuery drivers last fall. I don’t have a lot of detail on those, however, because the DataDirect guy who contacted me did so mainly to show off a nice toy, Stylus Studio. StylusS tudio is an XML query-building toolkit, available for online purchase for $800 or less. A lot of the users seem to be system integrators. Sales are split 50-50 between the DataDirect regular salesforce and online, apparently mainly from their own store, but I got the sense we’re not talking about huge numbers yet.

In usability when they demoed it to me it looked on a par with Cognos Improptu (a SQL query-building tool) circa the mid-1990s. But they do claim all the right things in round-trip code generation and so on.

Applications seem to be concentrated in intercompany information exchange, based on both legacy EDI (Electronic Data Interchange) and more modern web services. Other uses they cited were parsing web server logs and publishing relational data to a web page.

The technology/product seems to have bounced around for a while, from Object Design (OODBMS pioneer that took a premature shot at the XML database business, and the source of the ObjectStore technology I keep writing about in this blog) to eXcelon (merger partner for ODS, eventually bought by Progress), to Progress’s Sonic Software Division, and now to DataDirect after Progress bought them. Apparently none of those companies have or had top-end UI expertise …

If you want to get a better feel for XQuery, you could do worse than to play with this tool. For example, it’s what I think I’ll use in the unlikely case I ever get around to parsing the SpamAssassin add-ins to my email messages and trying to understand what SpamAssassin is and isn’t doing.

January 26, 2006

More on the inventory database example

In my recent column on XML storage, I referenced a Microsoft-provided example of an inventory database. A retailer (I think an online one) wanted to manage books and DVDs and so on, and search across attributes that we common to the different entity kinds, such as title.

Obviously, there are relational alternatives. Items have unique SKU numbers, and they have one of a limited number of kinds, and a set of integrity constraints could mandate that an item was listed in the appropriate table for its kind and no other, and then common attributes could be search on via views that amounted to unions (or derived tables kept synchronized via their own integrity constraints).

I pushed back at Microsoft — which is, you may recall, not just an XML advocate but also one of the largest RDBMS vendors — with this kind of reasoning, and they responded with the following, which I just decided to (with permission) post verbatim.

“If all you ever do is manage books and DVDs, then managing them relationally works well, especially if their properties do not change. However, you many want to add CDs and MP3 on memory cards and many other items that all have different properties. Then you quickly run into an administration overhead and may not be able to keep up with your schema evolution (and you need an additional DBA for managing the complex relational schema). Even if you use a relational approach that stores common properties in joint tables, the recomposition costs of the information for one item may become too expensive to bear.”

January 16, 2006

Finally a column on XML storage

After several months of headfakes, I finally did a column on XML storage this month. There turned out to be room for application discussion, but not for much technical nitty-gritty.

The app discussion is pretty consistent with what I’d already posted here, although I wish I’d gone into more detail on the inventory database example. (Stay tuned for followup here!)

I also intend to post soon with some technical detail about how XML storage is actually handled.

I also got some good insight from Marklogic about what customers wanted in their text-centric markets. More on that soon too.

And by the way — I didn’t pick the Oracle-bashing title. I also didn’t pick the Oracle-bashing title for my Network World “Hot Seat” video. But somehow, the Oracle-doubting parts of my views are of special interest to my friends in the media. And it’s not as if the titles say anything I actually disagree with …

January 11, 2006

Another OLTP success for memory-centric OO

Computerworld published a Progress ObjectStore OLTP success story.

Hotel reservations system, this time. Not as impressive as the Amazon store — what is? — but still nice.

December 20, 2005

Solid state (Flash) memory vs. RAM vs. disks

I just wrote a column and a blog post on the potential for diskless PCs based on flash drives. It was a fun exercise, and I think I kept it general enough that my lack of knowledge about hardware technology details didn’t lead me into significant error.

The first vendor response I got was from Bit Micro Networks, who seem to sell such drives for PCs and enterprise storage alike. One of their press releases touts an Oracle implementation. Interesting idea. It’s far from a substitute for full memory-centric data management, but it’s kind of an intermediate way of getting some of the benefits without altering your traditional software setup much at all.

← Previous PageNext Page →

Feed: DBMS (database management system), DW (data warehousing), BI (business intelligence), and analytics technology Subscribe to the Monash Research feed via RSS or email:

Login

Search our blogs and white papers

Monash Research blogs

User consulting

Building a short list? Refining your strategic plan? We can help.

Vendor advisory

We tell vendors what's happening -- and, more important, what they should do about it.

Monash Research highlights

Learn about white papers, webcasts, and blog highlights, by RSS or email.