May 8th, 2008 Curt Monash
In which we bring you another instantiation of Monash’s First Law of Commercial Semantics: Bad jargon drives out good.
When Enterprise DB announced a partnership with Truviso for a “blade,” I naturally assumed they were using the term in a more-or-less standard way, and hence believed that it was more than a “Barney” press release.* Silly me. Rather than referring to something closely akin to “datablade,” EnterpriseDB’s “blade” program turns out to just to be a catchall set of partnerships.
*A “Barney” announcement is one whose entire content boils down to “I love you; you love me.”
According to EnterpriseDB CTO Bob Zurek, the main features of the “blade” program include:
Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in Data types, EnterpriseDB and Postgres Plus, Open source RDBMS, Portability, transparency, and plug-compatibility, PostgreSQL, Relational database management systems, Specialized data management in general | 3 Comments »
April 29th, 2008 Curt Monash
Truviso and EnterpriseDB announced today that there’s a Truviso “blade” for Postgres Plus. By email, EnterpriseDB Bob Zurek endorsed my tentative summary of what this means technically, namely:
-
There’s data being managed transactionally by EnterpriseDB.
-
Truviso’s DML has all along included ways to talk to a persistent Postgres data store.
-
If, in addition, one wants to do stream processing things on the same data, that’s now possible, using Truviso’s usual DML.
Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in Analytics and analytic technologies, Business intelligence, Complex event/stream processing (CEP), Data types, EnterpriseDB and Postgres Plus, Games and virtual worlds, Memory-centric data management, Open source RDBMS, PostgreSQL, Specialized data management in general, Truviso | 1 Comment »
April 18th, 2008 Curt Monash
I chatted with Raj Cherabuddi and others on the Kickfire (formerly C2) team for over an hour on Monday, and now have a better sense of their story. There are some very basic questions I still don’t have answers to; I’ll fill those in when I can.
Highlights of what I have and haven’t figured out so far include:
-
Kickfire’s technology has two main parts: A SQL co-processor chip and a MySQL storage engine.
-
Kickfire makes a Type 0 appliance. If I understood correctly, it contains the chip, a couple of standard CPU cores, and 64 gigs of RAM. Or else it contains just the chip, and is meant to be hooked up to a 2U box with 64 gigs of RAM. I’m confused.
-
The Kickfire box can handle up to 3 terabytes of user data. The disk required for that is 4-5 terabytes without redundancy, 2X with. Based on that formulation and other clues, I’m guessing Kickfire — unlike other appliance vendors — doesn’t build in storage itself.
-
I don’t know whether the Kickfire chip is true custom silicon or an FPGA emulation.
-
The essential idea of the chip is dataflow programming for SQL, with pipelining between operations. This eliminates the overhead of registers and context switching. I don’t know what the trade-offs are, if any.
-
Kickfire’s database software is columnar, operating on compressed data even in RAM. In that, Kickfire’s story is most similar to Vertica’s, although I’m guessing Exasol may do something similar as well. Like Vertica, Kickfire uses multiple compression methods (they’re reluctant to give detail, but agreed it would be fair to say they use both something like dictionary/token and something like delta compression).
-
Kickfire’s software is ACID-compliant. You can do incremental loads or trickle feeds. Bulk load speed is 100 Gb/hour. Kickfire’s solution for the traditional problem of updating column stores is called “snapshots.” Without giving details, they position that as similar to the Vertica solution.
-
Like other MySQL storage engines, Kickfire inherits whatever data connectivity, stored procedure capabilities, user-defined functions ability, etc. that MySQL has.
-
Kickfire has no paying customers, but does have a slide showing many logos of “prospects and beta customers.”
-
Kickfire has no MPP capabilities at this time, but says adding those is “on the roadmap” and will be “easy.”
-
Kickfire submitted a 100 Gb TPC-H result, in which it beat the previous leaders — Exasol, ParAccel, and Microsoft – on price-performance, and lagged only Exasol and ParAccel on absolute performance. Kickfire is extremely proud of this. Indeed, I don’t recall another vendor ascribing that much weight to them in the entire history of TPCs.* Kickfire seems unfazed by the fact that its result is for a system listed with a ship date 6 months in the future (I’m guessing that’s the latest the TPC will allow), while the other results are for systems available today.
*Somebody – perhaps adman extraordinaire Rick Bennett? — may want to check my memory on this, but I think Oracle’s famed “Gentlemen, start your snails” ad in the early 1990s was about PC World tests, not TPCs. Oracle also had an ad about WW1-style planes nosediving, but I don’t think those referenced TPCs either.
Posted in Analytics and analytic technologies, Columnar architectures, Data warehouse appliances, Data warehousing, Database compression, Database theory and practice, Kickfire, Open source RDBMS, Relational database management systems | 3 Comments »
April 13th, 2008 Curt Monash
The MySQL user conference is upon us, and hence so are MySQL-related product announcements, including storage engines. One such is Kickfire. ScaleDB — smaller and earlier-stage — is another.
In a nutshell, ScaleDB’s proposition is:
-
Innovative approach to indexing relational DBMS, providing performance advantages.
-
Shared-everything scale-up that ScaleDB believes will leapfrog the MySQL engine competition already in Release 1. (In my opinion, this is the least plausible part of the ScaleDB story.)
-
State-of-the-art me-too facilities for locking, logging, replication/fail-over, etc., also already in Release 1.
Like many software companies with non-US roots, ScaleDB seems to have started with a single custom project, using a Patricia trie indexing system. Then they decided Patricia tries might be really useful for relational OLTP as well. The ScaleDB team now features four developers, plus half-time or so “Chief Architect” involvement from Vern Watts. Watts seems to pretty much have been Mr. IMS for the past four decades, and thus surely knows a whole lot about pointer-based database management systems; presumably, he’s responsible for the generic DBMS design features that are being added to the innovative indexing scheme. On ScaleDB’s advisory board is PeopleSoft veteran Rick Berquist, about whom I’ve had fond thoughts ever since he talked me into focusing on consulting as the core of my business.*
*More precisely, Rick pretty much tricked me into doing a day of consulting for $15K, then revealed that’s what he’d done, expressing the thought that he’d very much gotten his money’s worth. But I digress …
ScaleDB has no customers to date, but hopes to be in beta by the end of this year. Angels and a small VC firm have provided bridge loans; otherwise, ScaleDB has no outside investment. ScaleDB’s business model thoughts include:
Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in Mid-range DBMS, MySQL, OLTP database management, Open source RDBMS, Relational database management systems, ScaleDB | No Comments »
April 10th, 2008 Curt Monash
As previously announced, I did a webcast this afternoon, discussing database diversity. The title of the talk was taken directly from a post – What leading DBMS vendors don’t want you to realize — that argued mid-range DBMS are suitable for a broad variety of tasks. The overriding theme was a Clayton Christensen-style “disruption” narrative.
The sponsor was EnterpriseDB, which is fitting. While not the biggest DBMS industry disrupter in terms of revenue or visible impact (MySQL and Netezza say “Hi”), the Postgres family in general and EnterpriseDB in particular epitomize the disruption threat like nobody else, because of how broadly they substitute for market-leading database managers.
As I promised on the call, below is a post with links to further research backing up the points made. They’re numbered to match some of the presentation slides, which you can find at this link.
3. Much of the discussion of database diversity comes from a series of posts I coordinated with Mike Stonebraker.
4. At various times, starting on Slide 4, I made reference to datatype extensibility, a key feature of Oracle and DB2 – and a key advantage of Postgres over MySQL.
10. Capping off the database diversity discussion, Slide 10 mirrors this 11-point version of a data management software taxonomy.
13-14. I’ve posted many times about data warehousing DBMS and related technologies, including this overview of major analytic DBMS products, another recent overview of data warehouse specialty technologies, and an attempt to distinguish between data warehouse appliance myths and realities. Of particular interest for further research may be our sections on data warehouse appliances and columnar DBMS.
15. I do most of my posting about text search over on Text Technologies, specifically in the search category. Vendors I specifically mentioned as blending search with other kinds of data retrieval were Mark Logic and Attivio.
16. There’s a section here on native XML database management.
17. We also have a section on managing RDF and other graphical data models.
18. Ditto complex event/stream processing.
19. The only embeddable DBMS I’ve written much about recently is solidDB. And frankly, even in that case I’ve focused more on mid-tier caching uses, the now-canceled MySQL relationship, or general technology than I did specifically on embedded uses.
22-24. Back in February, 2007 I made what is probably still my clearest post explaining why I think market-leading DBMS vendors are in the process of getting disrupted.
Please subscribe to our feed!
Posted in EnterpriseDB and Postgres Plus, Mid-range DBMS, MySQL, Open source RDBMS, Oracle, PostgreSQL, Relational database management systems | No Comments »
March 28th, 2008 Curt Monash
The 451 Group just released a report on open source DBMS adoption. In a blog post announcing same, Matthew Aslett wrote (emphasis mine):
you only have to look at the comparative revenues of the open source and proprietary vendors to see that there is a vast chasm to be crossed.
“Chasm” memes were introduced by Geoffrey Moore, founder of the Chasm Group and author of Crossing the Chasm. His defining example was Oracle, and the database market in general. The core insight was that platform markets get to tipping points, after which the leaders have tremendous advantages that make them tend to remain leaders for a good long time.
The sequel to “chasm” theory is Clayton Christensen’s “disruption” rubric, popularized in The Innovator’s Dilemma. I’ve argued previously that the DBMS market is being disrupted, in both the ways that Christensen records: Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in Data warehouse appliances, Open source RDBMS, Relational database management systems | 1 Comment »
March 25th, 2008 Curt Monash
While talking with EnterpriseDB about today’s Postgres Plus announcements, I took the chance to clear up a point of confusion. Somebody told Seth Grimes that EnterpriseDB is out to compete with Greenplum, but that person was wrong. EnterpriseDB fondly hopes to manage multi-terabyte data warehouses, just as Oracle and Microsoft do with their respective general-purpose DBMS. However, EnterpriseDB is not going after the 10s-100s of terabytes sized DBMS that are the province of specialists such as Greenplum, Teradata, Netezza, or columnar DBMS vendors.
Even so, in GridSQL EnterpriseDB does seem to be open-sourcing MPP shared-nothing basics. There’s a lightweight optimizer that does a little (but only a little) more to minimize data movement beyond just optimizing queries on each node. And GridSQL knows how to replicate small tables across each node, a key aspect of many MPP designs. (Partition your facts; replicate your dimensions.)
Please subscribe to our feed!
Technorati Tags: GridSQL
Posted in Analytics and analytic technologies, Data warehousing, EnterpriseDB and Postgres Plus, Greenplum, Open source RDBMS, Relational database management systems | No Comments »
March 25th, 2008 Curt Monash
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 the rest of this entry »
Posted in Cache, EnterpriseDB and Postgres Plus, Mid-range DBMS, MySQL, OLTP database management, Open source RDBMS, Portability, transparency, and plug-compatibility, PostgreSQL, Relational database management systems | 1 Comment »
March 11th, 2008 Curt Monash
Last year, I thought that solidDB could at least potentially be an outstanding MySQL engine. But as per news posted on SourceForge last week, that’s not going to happen. At least, it’s not going to happen via any development efforts from IBM.
Please sign up for our feed!
Posted in IBM and DB2, Mid-range DBMS, MySQL, Open source RDBMS, Relational database management systems, solidDB | 4 Comments »
March 6th, 2008 Curt Monash
The relational DBMS industry is filled with startups. In some way or other, most of them are based on or make use of the open source project PostgreSQL. (Not all, of course; exceptions include DATAllegro and Infobright, which are based on Ingres and MySQL respectively.) But how they use PostgreSQL varies greatly. Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in EnterpriseDB and Postgres Plus, Greenplum, Open source RDBMS, PostgreSQL, Relational database management systems, Vertica Systems | 9 Comments »
February 14th, 2008 Curt Monash
I finally caught up with Bob Zurek about EnterpriseDB’s foray into the Elastra cloud. Here are some highlights:
- There have been dozens of applicants for the EnterpriseDB/Elastra beta program. As is usual in limited beta programs, EnterpriseDB is trying to sort out the ones who’ll make a big commitment from the tire-kickers.
- The main interest in EnterpriseDB/Elastra has come from ISVs, and secondarily from purely online businesses (e.g., SaaS vendors, web businesses, and a large MMO game vendors). There’s been a little interest from enterprises.
- Significant fractions of the EnterpriseDB/Elastra beta applications come from each of the Oracle, PostgreSQL, and MySQL user communities. A few come from SQL Server. None come from DB2.
- Bob praised Elastra for its technology in clustering, starting/stopping instances, etc. He also said that EnterpriseDB had “educated” Elastra on EnterpriseDB internals and/or admin tools, to make the integration work.
- EnterpriseDB will start turning on a few beta Elastra customers any day now (i.e., it may well not take until March, the original target).
Please subscribe to our feed!
Posted in Cloud computing, Elastra, EnterpriseDB and Postgres Plus, Mid-range DBMS, OLTP database management, Open source RDBMS, Relational database management systems | No Comments »
February 5th, 2008 Curt Monash
The Register reports on PostgreSQL 8.3, and emphasizes OLTP speedups and reductions in administrative burden:
Among the changes, Heap Only Tuples (HOT) that may cut the maintenance overhead of frequently updated tables by up to 75 per cent, spread checkpoints and background writer autotuning to reduce the impact of check points on response times, and an asynchronous commit option that also speeds the response times of certain transactions.
I wonder how EnterpriseDB compares on these features.
Edit: Slashdot has discussion and links. And here’s a PostgreSQL feature matrix.
Posted in EnterpriseDB and Postgres Plus, Mid-range DBMS, OLTP database management, Open source RDBMS, PostgreSQL | 1 Comment »
January 30th, 2008 Curt Monash
When Elastra announced their service to host MySQL and PostgreSQL in the Amazon S3/EC2 cloud, I immediately told my dear darling clients at EnterpriseDB they should do the same. Whereupon they told me it would happen soon. However, they neglected to tell me when it was actually announced. So I know no more than can be found in this Computerworld article.
But I’ll say this — it’s a very tempting option, both for new web-based applications or businesses, or simply as a development platform pending later redeployment.
Posted in Amazon, SimpleDB, and S3, Cloud computing, Elastra, EnterpriseDB and Postgres Plus, Mid-range DBMS, OLTP database management, Open source RDBMS, Relational database management systems, SaaS | 1 Comment »
January 28th, 2008 Curt Monash
And here’s the biggie.
Question of the day #3
What complex, high-volume transactional applications have actually been built in mid-range DBMS such as MySQL, PostgreSQL, FileMaker, or EnterpriseDB?
I’ve been flamed for suggesting that MySQL or FileMaker aren’t fully equal to Oracle and DB2 in supporting hard-core transactional applications. (Which is ironic, because I’ve also been flamed for suggesting hard-core transactional support isn’t as big a deal for DBMS selection as some relational purists insist. But I digress …) So I’m putting the question out there — what impressive transactional applications do the stand-alone mid-range DBMS actually support? Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in EnterpriseDB and Postgres Plus, FileMaker, Mid-range DBMS, MySQL, OLTP database management, Open source RDBMS, PostgreSQL, Relational database management systems | 20 Comments »
January 24th, 2008 Curt Monash
I may argue for the use of open source and other mid-range database management systems, but a lot of industry sentiment remains on the other side. Vendors of high-end RDBMS naturally advocate enterprise-wide single-vendor adoption. Many CIOs and industry analysts, overwhelmed by product proliferation, think that’s a neat idea as well.
And in fairness, they’re not entirely wrong. Here are 14 reasons for using high-end relational database management systems, even on applications for which mid-range DBMS would suffice. Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in Microsoft and SQL*Server, Mid-range DBMS, MySQL, OLTP database management, Open source RDBMS, Oracle, PostgreSQL, Relational database management systems | 17 Comments »
January 22nd, 2008 Curt Monash
For very high-end applications, the list of viable database management systems is short. Scalability can be a problem. (The rankings of most scalable alternatives differ in the OLTP and data warehouse realms.) Extreme levels of security can be had from only a few DBMS. (Oracle would have you believe there’s only one choice.) And if you truly need 99.99% uptime, there only are a few DBMS you even should consider.
But for most applications at any enterprise – and for all applications at most enterprises – super high-end DBMS aren’t required. There are relatively few applications that wouldn’t run perfectly well on PostgreSQL or EnterpriseDB today. Ingres and Progress OpenEdge aren’t far behind (they’re a little lacking in datatype support). Ditto Intersystems Cache’, although the nonrelational architecture will be off-putting to many. And to varying degrees, you can also do fine with MySQL, Pervasive PSQL, MaxDB, or a variety of other products – or for that matter with the cheap or free crippled versions of Oracle, SQL Server, DB2, and Informix.
What’s more, these mid-range database management systems can have significant advantages over their high-end brethren. Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in EnterpriseDB and Postgres Plus, IBM and DB2, Ingres, Intersystems and Cache', Microsoft and SQL*Server, Mid-range DBMS, MySQL, Open source RDBMS, Oracle, Pervasive Software, PostgreSQL, Progress, Apama, and DataDirect, Relational database management systems, SAP, BI Accelerator, and MaxDB | 14 Comments »
January 16th, 2008 Curt Monash
Sun’s planned acquisition of MySQL is inspiring a lot of discussion about open source business models. Typical is Michael Arrington’s cheerleading for the idea that you can make a lot of money with open source. More interesting is Gordon Haff’s suggestion that it’s a lot easier to make money with open source when you have other things to actually sell to the same customers (e.g., the rest of Sun’s product line). (A similar view can be found here.)
To analyze this more carefully, it helps to distinguish among three different aspects of open source models:
- Open source product packaging
- Open source product development
- Open source pricing
Here’s what I think about each in the case of database management systems. Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in MySQL, Open source RDBMS | 5 Comments »
January 16th, 2008 Curt Monash
More from me soon, but first here is a survey of what other people are saying about Sun’s billion-dollar deal to acquire MySQL:
- Jeremy Cole, evidently a very experienced high-end MySQL user, itemizes some serious problems with MySQL — optimizer, memory management, replication, and so on. (Uh, Jeremy — what part of the product do you like?) He also echoes a theme I’ve seen elsewhere, and to some extent noticed myself; MySQL has had a lot of management issues as a company.
- Jeffrey McManus calls out Sun’s promise to continue to support non-Java programming languages in MySQL. Kaj Arnö of MySQL makes the point emphatically, reciting a list of operating systems and development environments/languages MySQL will continue to support.
- Matt Asay quite reasonably interprets Sun’s move as a bid for overall leadership and development of the open source software platform industry. I would add that Sun CEO Jonathon Schwartz came up through the software side of the business. I would further add that Sun has a dismal track record with closed-source software acquisitions, including Forte’, NetDynamics, and the enterprise side of Netscape.
- Matt also has selected quotes from the press conference, including Sun saying the coopetitionally obvious “Yeah, we’ll continue serious support for PostgreSQL and Oracle too.” Brian Aker also supports the PostgreSQL point.
- Zack Urlocker of MySQL implies that Jonathon Schwartz was very involved in the deal personally. That makes all kinds of sense.
- 451 Group has some interesting links, and don’t miss the short comment thread.
- The official MySQL and Sun company lines are summarized in this Zack Urlocker post on Infoworld (as well as some of the links above) and this post from Jonathon Schwartz of Sun.
Posted in MySQL, Open source RDBMS, PostgreSQL, Relational database management systems | 2 Comments »
January 16th, 2008 Curt Monash
Of the many new specialty data warehouse DBMS and appliances, Infobright’s BrightHouse is the only leading one based on MySQL. I expect Sun and Infobright to have some interesting conversations now. Conversely, I wouldn’t be optimistic about any partnering discussions Infobright might have with, say, HP.
The most directly competitive relationship Sun now has to any future Infobright partnership is with ParAccel.
Posted in Analytics and analytic technologies, Data warehousing, Infobright and Brighthouse, MySQL, Open source RDBMS, ParAccel, Relational database management systems | 2 Comments »
January 10th, 2008 Curt Monash
If you’re interested in the world of mid-range, OLTP, and/or open source database management systems, Derek Rodner’s blog is worth checking out. His 2007 Year in Review post deserves a look — even though it’s about as unbiased and spin-free as Bill O’Reilly’s TV show, in that combines multiple shots each at Oracle and MySQL with some plugs for EnterpriseDB. I’ve already praised his post a month ago listing large numbers of EnterpriseDB successes. Of course there are multiple heartfelt arguments on behalf of Postgres (too many to link to specifically). And he even has a great set of tips — which I hereby recommend to all my vendor clients — on how best to use Google AdWords.
Posted in EnterpriseDB and Postgres Plus, Mid-range DBMS, OLTP database management, Open source RDBMS, PostgreSQL | 1 Comment »
December 18th, 2007 Curt Monash
Elastra is a startup offering MySQL and PostgreSQL SaaS instances in the Amazon S3/EC2 cloud. On their board is John Hummer, which I generally regard as a good thing, although it’s hardly a guarantee of success.* High Scalability raises some doubts about Elastra’s pricing, but I think that may be missing the point. Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in Amazon, SimpleDB, and S3, Cloud computing, Elastra, MySQL, OLTP database management, Open source RDBMS, PostgreSQL, SaaS | 2 Comments »
December 5th, 2007 Curt Monash
Ashlee Vance discovered that EnterpriseDB had shot its field sales force, and opined that EnterpriseDB might generally be in trouble. EnterpriseDB CEO Andy Astor and marketing exec Derek Rodner responded quickly in their respective blogs. Andy and I also talked on the phone.
As best as I can tell, here’s what’s actually going on: Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in EnterpriseDB and Postgres Plus, Open source RDBMS, Relational database management systems | 2 Comments »
October 23rd, 2007 Curt Monash
… or else I’m one heck of a webinar draw.
We had 364 attendees for today’s webcast with EnterpriseDB, which is a huge number for that sort of thing.
Posted in EnterpriseDB and Postgres Plus, Mid-range DBMS, Open source RDBMS, Relational database management systems | 1 Comment »
October 22nd, 2007 Curt Monash
To a first approximation, Infobright – maker of BrightHouse — is yet another data warehouse DBMS specialist with a columnar architecture, boasting great compression and running on commodity hardware, emphasizing easy set-up, simple administration, great price-performance, and hence generally low TCO. BrightHouse isn’t actually MPP yet, but Infobright confidently promises a generally available MPP version by the end of 2008. The company says that experience shows >10:1 compression of user data is realistic – i.e., an expansion ratio that’s fractional, and indeed better than 1/10:1. Accordingly, despite the lack of shared-nothing parallelism, Infobright claims a sweet spot of 1-10 terabyte warehouses, and makes occasional references to figures up to 30 terabytes or so of user data.
BrightHouse is essentially a MySQL storage engine, and hence gets a lot of connectivity and BI tool support features from MySQL for “free.” Beyond that, Infobright’s core technical idea is to chop columns of data into 64K chunks, called data packs, and then store concise information about what’s in the packs. The more basic information is stored in data pack nodes,* one per data pack. If you’re familiar with Netezza zone maps, data pack nodes sound like zone maps on steroids. They store maximum values, minimum values, and (where meaningful) aggregates, and also encode information as to which intervals between the min and max values do or don’t contain actual data values. Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in Analytics and analytic technologies, Columnar architectures, Data warehousing, Database compression, Infobright and Brighthouse, MySQL, Open source RDBMS, Relational database management systems | 1 Comment »
April 26th, 2007 Curt Monash
Reuters wrote a really stupid article on the MySQL/IBM deal, and some bloggers have gotten over-excited as well. Even the not-ignorant among these seem to be overlooking one or more of the following points:
- The IBM/MySQL deal is just for the iSeries.
- The iSeries is the successor to the AS/400 and System 38, and thus is in a decades-old family of machines that have some weirdnesses in their DBMS support.
-
In particular, DB2 on the iSeries isn’t the same thing as DB2 on other boxes, although multiple DB2s do at least nominally run there.
So while it’s interesting and nice, this deal isn’t that relevant to IBM’s mainstream software business at all.
Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in IBM and DB2, Mid-range DBMS, MySQL, OLTP database management, Open source RDBMS, Relational database management systems | 3 Comments »