DBMS product categories
Analysis of database management technology in specific product categories. Related subjects include:
This week is a REALLY good time to actively strengthen the MySQL forkers
As my first three posts on the Oracle/Sun merger suggested, I think Oracle will do a better job with MySQL product development than Sun has. But of course that’s a low hurdle. And so it leaves open the questions:
What should and/or will be the most widely adopted code lines of MySQL (or other open source DBMS),
especially for the types of users and vendors who are engaged with MySQL (as opposed to principal alternative PostgreSQL) today?
As much as I’ve bashed MySQL/MyISAM and MySQL/InnoDB for being low-quality general-purpose DBMS, I’d still hate to see MySQL-based development stall out. There are a number of MySQL engine providers with rather unique technology, that deserve a good front-end partner to build their products with. The high-volume sharding guys deserve the chance to continue down their current path as well. And so does the low-end mass market — although I’m least worried about them, as I can’t imagine any realistic scenario in which Oracle doesn’t offer a version of MySQL fully suited to support 10s of millions of WordPress and Joomla installations.
So far as I can tell, there are only four real and currently active candidates for MySQL code coordinator:
- MySQL itself, soon to be owned by Oracle.
- MariaDB, Monty Widenius’ proposed mainstream MySQL alternative
- Percona, which seems to have some fans as a superior alternative to vendor-supplied MySQL/InnoDB
- Drizzle, which is directly focused at web-centric MySQL users who never wanted a robust DBMS in the first place.
Patrick Galbraith and Steven Vaughan-Nichols did good jobs of illustrating the turmoil.
Oracle isn’t a very comfortable partner long term for the storage engine vendors, and Drizzle doesn’t seem to be what they need. So I think that Infobright, Kickfire, Tokutek, Calpont, et al. need to get aligned in a hurry with an outside MySQL provider such as Percona or MariaDB or a newcomer, preferably all with the same one. Yes, I understand that Infobright is getting a lot of marketing help from Sun these days, that Kickfire just got a nice-sounding Sun marketing announcement as well, and so on. But the time to start working toward the inevitable future is now.
And by “now” I mean “right now,” since the MySQL community is at this moment gathered together for its annual conference.
| Categories: Infobright, Kickfire, MySQL, Open source | 12 Comments |
MySQL storage engine round-up, with Oracle-related thoughts
Here’s what I know about MySQL storage engines, more or less.
- MySQL with MyISAM is fast. But it’s not transactional. Except for limited purposes, MySQL with MyISAM is a pretty crummy DBMS. Nothing can change that.
- MySQL with InnoDB is transactional. But it’s not particularly fast. MySQL with InnoDB is a pretty mediocre DBMS. Oracle could fix that, at least partially, over time.
- I don’t know much about Falcon, Maria, and so on. With Oracle winding up owning both MySQL and InnoDB, the motivation for those engines (except as Oracle-free forks) might fade.
- Infobright is the most established of the rest. At the moment I’m not recommending it for most industrial-strength uses unless the user is particularly cash-constrained. But I wouldn’t be surprised if that changed soon. A cheap, fast, simple columnar analytic DBMS has a place in the world.
- Kickfire is next in line, offering a hardware-based growth path for users who’ve maxed out on what unaided MySQL can do. It remains to be seen for how many users the desire to keep things simple and stay with MySQL outweighs the desire to avoid custom hardware. Having Oracle salespeople all over those accounts surely wouldn’t help. Kickfire also has a second market, namely OEM vendors who are mainly interested in the superfast chip. That would probably be pretty unaffected by Oracle.
- Tokutek offers a technical proposition that’s hard to match head-on without going the CEP route. Users who care are likely to be MySQL shops. Tokutek’s main challenge is to prove that it sufficiently outdoes competing technical strategies for sufficiently many users. Oracle ownership of MySQL seems pretty irrelevant to Tokutek’s success or failure.
- Calpont offers a kind of lightweight Exadata alternative. With Calpont’s packaging and positioning perennially unclear, it’s difficult to predict the effect of a particular change — i.e., Oracle buying MySQL — in Calpont’s market environment.
- I haven’t heard from transactionally-oriented ScaleDB since I wrote about them a year ago. Apparently, they’re rolling out beta product this week, and their venerable techie guru sadly passed away earlier this month.
| Categories: Calpont, Columnar database management, Data warehousing, Exadata, Infobright, Kickfire, MySQL, Open source, Oracle, Tokutek and TokuDB | 14 Comments |
Should the Oracle/MySQL combo face antitrust opposition?
Oracle is a powerhouse in database management systems, but it’s hardly a monopolist. IBM revels in contriving figures that show it to have market share comparable to Oracle’s, and Microsoft has a very solid position as well. Smaller players like Teradata, Sybase, and MySQL are also thriving. And of course there’s a whole wave of newer DBMS companies, from Netezza on, showing that the DBMS industry isn’t even the secure oligopoly it appeared to be earlier this decade.
However, it’s certainly legitimate to define a product category of “real” DBMS that includes everything from MySQL on up, but not Microsoft Access and other low-end data management products. In that universe, while MySQL is a trivial addition to Oracle’s revenue, it’s a huge increment to Oracle’s unit market share. A merged Oracle/MySQL will dwarf the competition in ways that Oracle or MySQL alone don’t. Read more
| Categories: MySQL, Open source, Oracle | 10 Comments |
First thoughts on Oracle acquiring Sun
- Wow.
- And during the week of the MySQL conference, too.
- In the must-read slide presentation, Oracle’s says all the right things about being committed to all product lines and technologies. On the whole, this is believable.
- Oracle says it’s focusing Sun hardware sales on existing Oracle/Sun customers. Makes sense.
- Oracle mentions OpenStorage prominently. Makes sense. Integrating DBMS with storage is Oracle’s high-end DBMS future. (E.g., Exadata.)
- HP can’t be happy.
- MySQL and InnoDB are reunited.
- MySQL is apt to get decent, much as it would have under IBM.
- Even so, if you really believe in open source’s freedom, it’s time to look at PostgreSQL …
- … or EnterpriseDB’s Postgres Plus, although my recent dealings with EnterpriseDB underscore the importance of being VERY careful about counting your fingers after you shake hands with that company.
- And I wouldn’t be surprised if another shoe dropped soon on the EnterpriseDB front. (Please excuse the mixed metaphor.)
- I used to laugh at how many different app servers Sun had acquired. Oracle acquired a number too. Together it’s quite a pile of them.
- Oracle says acquiring Java is a great big deal. I’m not sure I see why that would really be true.
More later. I have a radio interview in a few minutes on a very different subject.
| Categories: EnterpriseDB and Postgres Plus, HP and Neoview, MySQL, Open source, Oracle, PostgreSQL | 20 Comments |
Calpont update — you read it here first!
Calpont has gone through a lot of strategy iterations since its founding. The super-short version is that Calpont originally planned an appliance built around a SQL chip, much like Kickfire. But after various changes in management and venture backing, Calpont turned itself into a software-only analytic DBMS vendor relying on a MySQL front end. Calpont is now at the stage of announcing an Early Adopter program at the MySQL conference on Wednesday, although details of Calpont’s product release timing, pricing, feature set, etc. are all To Be Determined.
Minor highlights of the Calpont technical story include: Read more
| Categories: Calpont, Columnar database management, Data warehousing, MySQL, Open source, Parallelization, Theory and architecture | Leave a Comment |
Infobright update
For the past couple of quarters, Infobright has been MySQL’s partner of choice for larger data warehousing applications. Infobright’s stated business metrics, and I quote, include:
> 50 Customers in 7 Countries
> 25 Partners on 4 continents
A vibrant open source community
+1 million visitors
Approaching 10,000 downloads
2,000 active community participants
These may be compared with analogous metrics Infobright offered in February.
Infobright has also made or promised a variety of technological enhancements. Ones that are either shipping now or promised soon include: Read more
| Categories: Columnar database management, Data warehousing, Infobright, MySQL, Open source | 6 Comments |
Ingres update
I talked with Ingres today. Much of the call was fluff — open-source rah-rah, plus some numbers showing purported success, but so finely parsed as to be pretty meaningless. (To Ingres’ credit, they did offer to let me talk w/ their CFO, even if they offered no promises as to whether he’d offer any more substantive information.) Highlights included: Read more
| Categories: Actian and Ingres, Data warehousing, EnterpriseDB and Postgres Plus, MySQL, Open source, Oracle, PostgreSQL, Sybase | 6 Comments |
Kickfire update
I talked recently with my clients at Kickfire, especially newish CEO Bruce Armstrong. I also visited the Kickfire blog, which among other virtues features a fairly clear overview of Kickfire technology. (I did my own Kickfire overview in October.) Highlights of the current Kickfire story include:
- Kickfire is initially focused on three heavily overlapping markets — network event analysis, the general Web 2.0/clickstream/online marketing analytics area, and MySQL/LAMP data warehousing.
- Kickfire has blogged about a few sales to unnamed customers in those markets.
- I think network management is a market that’s potentially friendly to five-figure-cost appliances. After all, networking equipment is generally sold in appliance form. Kickfire doesn’t dispute this analysis.
- Kickfire’s sales so far are to run databases in the sub-terabyte range, although both Kickfire and its customers intend to run bigger databases soon. (Kickfire describes the range as 300 GB – 1 TB.) Not coincidentally, Kickfire believes that MySQL doesn’t scale very well past 100 GB without a lot of partitioning effort (in the case of data warehouses) or sharding (in the case of OLTP).
- When Bruce became CEO, he let go some sales, marketing, and/or business development folks. He likes to call this a restructuring of Kickfire rather than a reduction-in-force, but anyhow — that’s what happened. There are now about 50 employees, and Kickfire still has most of the $20 million it raised last August in the bank. Edit: The company clarifies that it actually wound up with more sales and marketing people than before.
- Kickfire has thankfully deemphasized various marketing themes I found annoying, such as ascribing great weight to TPC-H benchmarks or explaining why John von Neumann originally made bad choices in his principles of computer design.
| Categories: Data warehouse appliances, Data warehousing, Kickfire, MySQL, Open source, Web analytics | 1 Comment |
Why should anybody worry about Oracle’s tweaks to Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL)?
Internet News offers an overview of how Oracle’s own version of Red Hat Enterprise Linux does or doesn’t different from generic RHEL. The defining example appears to be an alternate file system that Oracle finds useful, but Red Hat doesn’t want to bother offering. (Oracle says it donates all extensions back to the community, putting the onus on the community whether or not to use them in Linux versions other than Oracle’s.) The question is:
Does this count as an Oracle fork of (Red Hat Enterprise) Linux or doesn’t it?
My answer is:
Who cares? Read more
| Categories: Open source, Oracle | 1 Comment |
Oracle introduces a half-rack version of Exadata
Oracle has introduced what amounts to a half-rack Exadata machine. My thoughts on this basically boil down to “makes sense” and “no big deal.” Specifically:
- The new Baby Exadata still holds 10 terabytes or more.
- Most specialty analytic DBMS purchases are still for databases of 10 terabytes or smaller.
- Large enterprise data warehouse projects are often being deferred or cut back due to the economic crunch, but smaller projects with credible, quick ROIs are doing fine.
- Exadata is evidently being sold overwhelmingly to Oracle loyalists. Other analytic DBMS vendors aren’t telling me of serious Exadata competition yet. If the market for Exadata is primarily “happy Oracle data warehouse users”, that’s mainly folks who have <5-10 terabytes of user data today.
- Oracle Exadata beta tests were done on a kind of half-rack configuration anyway.
| Categories: Data warehouse appliances, Data warehousing, Exadata, Oracle | Leave a Comment |