IBM InfoSphere Warehouse pricing, packaging, compression and more
IBM InfoSphere Warehouse 9.7.3 has been announced, and is planned for general availability late this month. IBM InfoSphere Warehouse is, in essence, DB2-plus, where the “plus” comprises:
- DPF (Data Partitioning Feature) — i.e., the ability to do shared-nothing scale-out.
- Unimportant add-ons — e.g., a mere 5 seats of the Cognos BI tool.
The main news in this release of InfoSphere Warehouse is probably pricing. While IBM has long had a funky server-power-based pricing scheme, it is now adding per-terabyte pricing, with a twist: IBM InfoSphere Warehouse now can be bought per terabyte of compressed user data. Specifically:
- IBM InfoSphere Warehouse 9.7.3 Enterprise Edition can be bought for production for $70K or so per terabyte of compressed user data.
- IBM InfoSphere Warehouse 9.7.3 Departmental Edition can be bought for production for $35K or so per terabyte of compressed user data.
- Development/test seats of IBM InfoSphere Warehouse cost about $2K per user.
- High availability/disaster recovery instances are priced as if they were managing 1 TB each — unless, of course, you have an active-active configuration, in which case they’re priced according to their full amount of data.
Per-terabyte pricing is generally a good way to think about analytic DBMS costs, for at least two reasons: Read more
| Categories: Data warehousing, Database compression, IBM and DB2, Pricing | 1 Comment |
Teradata integrates in solid-state storage
For once, I think Teradata’s annual hardware refresh is pretty interesting, because of the integration of flash storage into its high-end “active enterprise data warehouse” product line. The essence of the announcement is:
- Teradata is rolling out a new appliance,* the 6680, which combines hard-disk and solid-state drives, relying on Teradata Virtual Storage.
- Teradata is also rolling out a hard-disk-based appliance,* the 6650, in a more routine annual refresh.
| Categories: Data warehouse appliances, Pricing, Solid-state memory, Teradata | 3 Comments |
Revolution Analytics update
I wasn’t too impressed when I spoke with Revolution Analytics at the time of its relaunch last year. But a conversation Thursday evening was much clearer. And I even learned some cool stuff about general predictive modeling trends (see the bottom of this post).
Revolution Analytics business and business model highlights include:
- Revolution Analytics is an open-core vendor built around the R language. That is, Revolution Analytics offers proprietary code and support, with subscription pricing, that help in the use of open source software.
- Unlike most open-core vendors I can think of, Revolution Analytics takes little responsibility for the actual open source part. Some “grants” for developing certain open source R pieces seem to be the main exception. While this has caused some hard feelings, I don’t have an accurate sense for their scope or severity.
- Revolution Analytics also sells a single-user/workstation version of its product, freely admitting that this is mainly a lead generation strategy or, in my lingo, a “break-even leader.”
- Revolution Analytics boasts around 100 customers, split about 70-30 between the workstation seeding stuff and the real server product.
- Revolution Analytics has “about” 37 employees. Headquarters are at 101 University Avenue (do I have to say in what city? 🙂 ). There are also a development office in Seattle and a sales office in New York.
- Revolution Analytics’ pricing is by size of server. “Small” servers — i.e. up to 12 cores — start at $25K/year.
- Unsurprisingly, adoption is more alongside SAS et al. than rip-and-replace.
| Categories: Health care, Investment research and trading, Open source, Parallelization, Predictive modeling and advanced analytics, Pricing, Revolution Analytics, SAS Institute | 2 Comments |
Comments on the 2011 Forrester Wave for Enterprise Data Warehouse Platforms
The Forrester Wave: Enterprise Data Warehouse Platforms, Q1 2011 is now out,* hot on the heels of the Gartner Magic Quadrant. Unfortunately, this particular Forrester Wave is riddled with inaccuracy. Read more
| Categories: Analytic technologies, Columnar database management, Data warehousing, EMC, Exadata, Greenplum, Netezza, Oracle, Pricing, SAP AG, Sybase, Teradata, Vertica Systems | 8 Comments |
Comments on the Gartner 2010/2011 Data Warehouse Database Management Systems Magic Quadrant
Edit: Comments on the February, 2012 Gartner Magic Quadrant for Data Warehouse Database Management Systems — and on the companies reviewed in it — are now up.
The Gartner 2010 Data Warehouse Database Management Systems Magic Quadrant is out. I shall now comment, just as I did to varying degrees on the 2009, 2008, 2007, and 2006 Gartner Data Warehouse Database Management System Magic Quadrants.
Note: Links to Gartner Magic Quadrants tend to be unstable. Please alert me if any problems arise; I’ll edit accordingly.
In my comments on the 2008 Gartner Data Warehouse Database Management Systems Magic Quadrant, I observed that Gartner’s “completeness of vision” scores were generally pretty reasonable, but their “ability to execute” rankings were somewhat bizarre; the same remains true this year. For example, Gartner ranks Ingres higher by that metric than Vertica, Aster Data, ParAccel, or Infobright. Yet each of those companies is growing nicely and delivering products that meet serious cutting-edge analytic DBMS needs, neither of which has been true of Ingres since about 1987. Read more
More notes on Membase and memcached
As a companion to my post about Membase last week, the company has graciously allowed me to post a rather detailed Membase slide deck. (It even has pricing.) Also, I left one point out.
Membase announced a Cloudera partnership. I couldn’t detect anything technically exciting about that, but it serves to highlight what I do find to be an interesting usage trend. A couple of big Web players (AOL and ShareThis) are using Hadoop to crunch data and derive customer profile data, then feed that back into Membase. Why Membase? Because it can serve up the profile in a millisecond, as part of a bigger 40-millisecond-latency request.
And why Hadoop, rather than Aster Data nCluster, which ShareThis also uses? Umm, I didn’t ask.
When I mentioned this to Colin Mahony, he said Vertica had similar stories. However, I don’t recall whether they were about Membase or just memcached, and he hasn’t had a chance to get back to me with clarification. (Edit: As per Colin’s comment below, it’s both.)
| Categories: Aster Data, Cache, Cloudera, Couchbase, Hadoop, memcached, Memory-centric data management, NoSQL, Pricing, Specific users, Vertica Systems, Web analytics | 7 Comments |
Notes on data warehouse appliance prices
I’m not terribly motivated to do a detailed analysis of data warehouse appliance list prices, in part because:
- Everybody knows that in practice data warehouse appliances tend to be deeply discounted from list price.
- The only realistic metric to use for pricing data warehouse appliances is price-per-terabyte, and people have gotten pretty sick of that one.
That said, here are some notes on data warehouse appliance prices. Read more
| Categories: Data warehouse appliances, Data warehousing, Database compression, EMC, Exadata, Greenplum, Netezza, Oracle, Pricing | 8 Comments |
Workday, Inc. company overview
My main post on Workday’s technology got really long, so I decided to split out a company backgrounder separately. Here goes.
Workday, Inc. was founded by Dave Duffield and Aneel Bhusri, who’d previously worked together at PeopleSoft. It is generally the case that the companies Dave starts: Read more
| Categories: Pricing, Software as a Service (SaaS), Workday | 4 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 |
Cloudera Enterprise and Hadoop evolution
I talked with Cloudera a couple of weeks ago in connection with the impending release of Cloudera Enterprise. I’d say: Read more