DBMS product categories
Analysis of database management technology in specific product categories. Related subjects include:
Yet more on the GPL, WordPress themes, and the implications for MySQL storage engines
The debate I wrote about a few days ago over whether or not the WordPress theme called Thesis needed to be GPLed has been resolved in practice – it will be. More precisely, the parts that WordPress developers and the Free Software Foundation said need to be GPLed will be GPLed, while the rest won’t be, those parts being, in essence, the more “artistic” elements.
A consensus seems to have emerged that Thesis had actually copied beyond-fair-use amounts of WordPress code, which if true was Game Over. Beyond that, however, both sides of the strongly-viral-GPL debate scored some points. Read more
| Categories: MySQL, Open source | 6 Comments |
New insights into the GPL vs. MySQL storage engine debates
Around the time of Oracle’s acquisition of Sun and hence MySQL, there was a lot of discussion as to whether MySQL’s GPL license could inhibit MySQL storage engine vendors from selling their products without MySQL code (e.g., with MySQL-fork front-ends). I argued No. Most people, however, seemed to think “Yes, and even if the matter isn’t clear, the threat of nasty lawyers creates enough FUD to be a practical market problem for the storage engine vendors.” Based on those concerns, I eventually took the position that Oracle should be inhibited for antitrust reasons from invoking its real or alleged GPL rights to mess with the MySQL storage engine vendors. Oracle’s agreement with the EU alleviated that concern, except that there was an annoying time limit on the alleviation.
Now a related can of worms has been opened in a related technology area — WordPress and WordPress themes. Since many bloggers use WordPress, this has gotten a lot of attention, and some interesting new insights have emerged. Read more
| Categories: MySQL, Open source, Oracle | 10 Comments |
Sybase SQL Anywhere
After Powersoft acquired Watcom and its famed Fortran compiler, marketing VP Tom Herring told me that the hidden jewel of the acquisition might well be a little DBMS, Watcom SQL. To put it mildly, Tom was right. Watcom SQL became SQL Anywhere; Powersoft was acquired by Sybase; Powersoft’s and Sybase’s main products both fell on hard times; Sybase built a whole mobile technology division around SQL Anywhere; and the whole thing just got sold for billions of dollars to SAP. Chris Kleisath recently briefed me on SQL Anywhere Version 12 (released to manufacturing this month), which seemed like a fine opportunity to catch up on prior developments as well.
The first two things to understand about SQL Anywhere is that there actually are three products:
- Sybase SQL Anywhere, a mid-range relational DBMS.
- Sybase UltraLite, a DBMS for mobile devices.
- Sybase MobiLink, a replication/sync tool.
and also that there are three main deployment/use cases:
- Generic desktop or server computers. This was the original market for SQL Anywhere.
- Laptop/handheld computers. This was the original growth market for SQL Anywhere. In particular, Siebel Systems’ first growth spurt was selling sales force automation software on laptop computers with SQL Anywhere underneath.
- Specialized devices. Earlier this decade, Sybase thought SQL Anywhere’s big growth market was on specialized devices. (I recall a video featuring some kind of automated pill dispensing machine for hospitals.)
| Categories: Mid-range, Progress, Apama, and DataDirect, Specific users, Sybase | Leave a Comment |
More on Greenplum and EMC
I talked with Ben Werther of Greenplum for about 40 minutes, which was my first post-merger Greenplum/EMC briefing. “Historical” highlights include:
- Ben says Greenplum wasn’t being shopped, by which he means Greenplum was out raising more capital and the fund-raising was going well. Note: Half or so of Greenplum’s deals were subscription-priced, so it had weaker cash flow than it would have if it were doing equally well selling perpetual licenses.
- However, joint engineering was also going well with, e.g., Greenplum CTO Luke Lonergan spending time at EMC facilities in Cork, Ireland. And one thing led to another …
- Greenplum has ~ 140 customers, vs. ~65 five quarters ago, 100+ at year-end, and an acquisition rate of 12-15/quarter last fall.
- A typical “small” paying customer for Greenplum starts with 10-20 TB of data.
- Greenplum Chorus isn’t generally available yet, with rollout energy being focused on Greenplum 4.0. Note: As important as it is for overall industry direction, Greenplum Chorus is a product which won’t be a terribly big deal in Release 1 anyway.
Highlights looking forward include: Read more
| Categories: Data warehouse appliances, Data warehousing, EMC, Greenplum, Market share and customer counts | 7 Comments |
Why analytic DBMS increasingly need to be storage-aware
In my quick reactions to the EMC/Greenplum announcement, I opined
I think that even software-only analytic DBMS vendors should design their systems in an increasingly storage-aware manner
promising to explain what I meant later on. So here goes. Read more
| Categories: Data warehouse appliances, Data warehousing, Solid-state memory, Storage, Theory and architecture | 6 Comments |
EMC is buying Greenplum
EMC is buying Greenplum. Most of the press release is a general recapitulation of Greenplum’s marketing messages, the main exceptions being (emphasis mine):
The acquisition of Greenplum will be an all-cash transaction and is expected to be completed in the third quarter of 2010, subject to customary closing conditions and regulatory approvals. The acquisition is not expected to have a material impact to EMC GAAP and non-GAAP EPS for the full 2010 fiscal year. Upon close, Bill Cook will lead the new data computing product division and report to Pat Gelsinger. EMC will continue to offer Greenplum’s full product portfolio to customers and plans to deliver new EMC Proven reference architectures as well as an integrated hardware and software offering designed to improve performance and drive down implementation costs.
Greenplum is one of my biggest vendor clients, and EMC is just becoming one, but of course neither side gave me a heads-up before the deal happened, nor have I yet been briefed subsequently. With those disclaimers out of the way, some of my early thoughts include:
- I wish my clients would never buy each other, but it’s inevitable.
- I don’t think anybody evaluating Greenplum should be much influenced by this deal one way or the other. (Whether they will be is of course a different matter.)
- EMC tends to run its bigger software acquisitions in a fairly hands-off manner. There’s no particular FUD (Fear/Uncertainty/Doubt) reason why this deal should stop anybody from buying Greenplum software.
- I also don’t think adding a rich parent adds much of a reason to buy from Greenplum. But if you’re the type who’s nervous about smaller vendors — well, Greenplum now isn’t so small.
- Greenplum Chorus could, in principle, work with non-Greenplum DBMS. That possibility suddenly looks a lot more realistic.
- The list of analytic DBMS vendors with an appliance orientation is pretty impressive, including:
- Oracle, with Exadata
- Microsoft, partially
- Teradata
- Netezza
- Now EMC/Greenplum, at least partially
- Weaker players such as:
- The ailing Kickfire, which a client (not Kickfire itself) tells me is being shopped around
- The reeling HP Neoview
- XtremeData, but I’m still waiting to hear of XtremeData’s first real sale
- Greenplum is something of a specialist in large databases. EMC has to love that.
- Greenplum’s weakness is concurrency.
- Greenplum’s “polymorphic storage” is a good fit for a storage vendor with appliance-y ideas.
- And finally — I think that even software-only analytic DBMS vendors should design their systems in an increasingly storage-aware manner, and have been advising my vendor clients of same. I’ll blog that line of reasoning separately when I get a chance, and edit in a link here after I do.
Related links (edit)
- Here’s the promised post as to why analytic DBMS need to be ever more storage-aware.
- Dave Kellogg crunched the EMC/Greenplum numbers, coming up with an estimated valuation range of $3-400 million, the high end of which is rumored to be correct.
- Merv Adrian suggests the big EMC/Greenplum loser is ParAccel, a viewpoint which presumably presupposes that the EMC/ParAccel partnership was significant in the first place.
- I talked with Ben Werther and posted more about Greenplum and EMC.
| Categories: Data warehouse appliances, EMC, Greenplum, Storage | 13 Comments |
Riptano, and Cassandra adoption
Tonight’s Cassandra technology post got plenty long enough on its own, so I’m separating out business and adoption issues here. For starters, known Cassandra users include:
- Facebook, which has said it has 150 or so Cassandra nodes (but see below)
- Twitter, which has said it has 45 or so Cassandra nodes
- Rackspace, which used to be Jonathan Ellis’ employer, and now is backing Cassandra company Riptano
- Digg, which along with Twitter and Rackspace was one of the three major users helping advance the Cassandra project
- OpenX, Simple Geo, Digital Reasoning, who Jonathan cited as production users in March
- Cloudkick, as noted and linked in my other post
- Two customers Riptano named at launch (but I’ve forgotten who they were*)
Fetlife, Meebo, and others seem to at least have a healthy interest in Cassandra, based on their level of involvement in a forthcoming Cassandra Summit. That said, the @Fetlife tweetstream features numerous yelps of pain, and I don’t mean the recreational kind. Read more
| Categories: Cassandra, DataStax, Facebook, Market share and customer counts, NoSQL, Open source, Parallelization, Pricing, Specific users | 5 Comments |
Cassandra technical overview
Back in March, I talked with Jonathan Ellis of Rackspace, who runs the Apache Cassandra project. I started drafting a blog post then, but never put it up. Then Jonathan cofounded Riptano, a company to commercialize Cassandra, and so I talked with him again in May. Well, I’m finally finding time to clear my Cassandra/Riptano backlog. I’ll cover the more technical parts below, and the more business- or usage-oriented ones in a companion Cassandra/Riptano post.
Jonathan’s core claims for Cassandra include:
- Cassandra is shared-nothing.
- Cassandra has good approaches to replication and partitioning, right out of the box.
- In particular, Cassandra is good for use cases that distribute a database around the world and want to access it at “local” latencies. (Indeed, Jonathan asserts that non-local replication is a significant non-big-data Cassandra use case.)
- Cassandra’s scale-out is application-transparent, unlike sharded MySQL’s.
- Cassandra is fast at both appends and range queries, which would be hard to accomplish in a pure key-value store.
In general, Jonathan positions Cassandra as being best-suited to handle a small number of operations at high volume, throughput, and speed. The rest of what you do, as far as he’s concerned, may well belong in a more traditional SQL DBMS. Read more
| Categories: Amazon and its cloud, Cassandra, DataStax, Facebook, Google, Log analysis, NoSQL, Open source, Parallelization | 4 Comments |
Details and analysis of the VoltDB argument
Todd Hoff (High Scalability blog) posted a lengthy examination of the case and use cases for VoltDB. That excellent post, in turn, is based on a Mike Stonebraker* webinar for VoltDB, for which the slide deck is happily available. It’s all nicely consistent with what I wrote about VoltDB last month, in connection with its launch. Read more
| Categories: In-memory DBMS, Michael Stonebraker, OLTP, Parallelization, Theory and architecture, VoltDB and H-Store | 3 Comments |
Netezza’s silicon balance
As I’ve mentioned in a couple of other posts, Netezza is stressing that the most recent wave of its technology is software-only, with no hardware upgrades made or needed. In other words, Netezza boxes already have all the silicon they need. But of course, there are really at least three major aspects to the Netezza silicon story – FPGA (Field-Programmable Gate Array), CPU, and RAM.
- Netezza planned to be “generous” in its original TwinFin FPGA capacity, anticipating software upgrades like the ones it’s introducing now. It is satisfied that this strategy worked. More on this below.
- The same surely applies to CPU.
- What’s more, I get the sense that the CPU turned out in practice to be even more over-provisioned than they anticipated …
- … at least when one just considers Netezza’s base NPS software.
- However, I suspect that if the advanced analytics capability takes off, Netezza will determine that more CPU is always better.
- And by the way, NEC is making versions of Netezza appliances with more advanced chips than Netezza is. So if anybody should really, really need more CPU in their Netezza boxes, there’s a very straightforward way to make that happen. (And if there were nontrivial demand for that, appropriate support plans could surely be structured.)
- Everybody needs to be careful about RAM. Netezza is surely no exception.
The major parts of Netezza’s FPGA software are:
- Compress Engine 2. This is Netezza’s new way of doing compression.
- Compress Engine 1. This is Netezza’s old way of doing compression. It is being kept around so that existing Netezza tables don’t suddenly have to be changed or reloaded.
- Project Engine. Guess what this does.
- Restrict Engine. Ditto.
- Visibility Engine. This enforces ACID and handles row-level security. It is “sort of a corner of” the Restrict Engine (Actually, Netezza seems to waver as to whether to describe “Restrict” and “Visibility” as being two engines or one.)
- Miscellaneous plumbing.
If I understood correctly, each Netezza FPGA has two each of the engines in parallel.
Related link
- An August, 2009 post on what Netezza does in its FPGA