Structured documents
Analysis of data management technology based on a structured-document model, or optimized for XML data. Related subjects include:
- Text data management
- Object-oriented database management
- Mark Logic
- IBM’s DB2 pureXML
- (in Text Technologies) More extensive coverage of text search
The Coral8 story
Complex event/stream processing vendor Coral8 raised its hand and offered a briefing – non-technical, alas, but at least it was a start. Here are some of the highlights: Read more
Nonstandard data management software — beyond the Bowling Alley?
I just finished a short Monash Letter on markets for nonstandard data management software. Of course, the whole thing is available only to Monash Advantage members, but here are some salient points:
- When new kinds of data are managed, new kinds of data management are used. More precisely, the old ways are tried first — but once they fail new technologies are tried out.
- Up through the “Bowling Alley,” markets for nonstandard data management technology commonly follow the classic Geoffrey Moore pattern. However, they rarely experience a “Tornado” or mass adoption.
- I think this is apt to change. My three strongest candidates are native XML, RDF, and memory-centric event/stream processing used for data reduction (as opposed to sub-millisecond latency, which I do think will continue to be a niche requirement).
| Categories: Memory-centric data management, RDF and graphs, Streaming and complex event processing (CEP), Structured documents | Leave a Comment |
Native XML engine short list
I’ve been implying that the short list for native XML database engine vendors should be MarkLogic, IBM, and maybe Microsoft, on the theory that Progress and Intersystems tried the market and pulled back. Well, add Intersystems to the list, and not necessarily in last place. They’ve long had a very fast nonrelational engine in Cache’. Perhaps building Ensemble on it has induced them to sharpen up the XML capabilities again.
Anyhow, while I’m not at liberty to explain more of my reasoning (i.e., to disclose my evidence) — Cache’ should be taken seriously as an XML DBMS alternative … even if I never can seem to get a proper DBMS briefing from them (which is far from entirely being their fault).
| Categories: IBM and DB2, Intersystems and Cache', MarkLogic, Microsoft and SQL*Server, Progress, Apama, and DataDirect, Structured documents | 1 Comment |
Lessons from EnterpriseDB
I had a nice conversation yesterday with Jim Mlodgenski of EnterpriseDB, covering both generalities and EnterpriseDB-specific stuff. Many of the generalities were predictable, and none were terribly shocking. Even so, I am dressed as Captain Obvious, and shall repeat a few of the ones I found interesting below:
| Categories: EnterpriseDB and Postgres Plus, Mid-range, OLTP, Open source, Structured documents, Theory and architecture | 2 Comments |
Mark Logic and the MarkLogic Server
I’ve been interested in the Mark Logic story from the first time CEO Dave Kellogg told me about it. Basically, Mark Logic sells an XML-based DBMS optimized for text search, called MarkLogic Server. For obvious reasons, they don’t want to position it as a DBMS; hence they call it an “XML content server” instead. I posted about their marketing and application focus over on Text Technologies. In this post, I’ll dive a little deeper into the core technology.
Read more
| Categories: MarkLogic, Structured documents | 3 Comments |
Philip Howard likes Viper
Philip Howard likes DB2’s Viper release. Truth be told, Philip Howard seems to like most products, whether they deserve it or not. But in this case, I think his analysis is spot-on.
| Categories: IBM and DB2, OLTP, Structured documents | Leave a Comment |
DBMS2 at IBM
I had a chat a couple of weeks ago with Bob Picciano, who runs servers (i.e., DBMS) for IBM. I came away feeling that, while they don’t use that name, they’re well down the DBMS2 path. By no means is this SAP’s level of commitment; after all, they have to cater to traditional technology strategies as well. But they definitely seem to be getting there.
Why do I say that? Well, in no particular order:
- They have a huge commitment to a data integration business, with an increasing XML focus.
- Their favorite buzzword these days is “information-intensive,” which seems to amount to semi-composite apps that may talk in part to unstructured/semi-structured data.
- They’re serious about their XML data server.
- Unprompted – well, OK, he’s clearly read my stuff, but other than that it was unprompted – Bob referred to one of the key benefits (real and perceived) of XML storage as being “schema flexibility.”
- By accident or design, IBM has a multi-server, horses-for-courses DBMS strategy: DB2 in two important flavors, XML server, Multivalue/Pick (that’s growing, by the way), and so on.
The big piece of a DBMS2 strategy that IBM seems to be lacking is a data-oriented services repository. IBM has had disasters in the past with over-grand repository plans, so they’re treading cautiously this time around. There also might be an organizational issue; DBMS and integration technology sit in separate divisions, and I doubt it’s yet appreciated throughout IBM how central data is to an SOA strategy.
But that not-so-minor detail aside, IBM definitely seems to be developing a DBMS2-like technology vision.
| Categories: EAI, EII, ETL, ELT, ETLT, IBM and DB2, OLTP, Structured documents | Leave a Comment |
Marklogic’s experiences — from the warhorse’s mouth!
Another subject I meant to blog about is what all I’ve learned from Mark Logic about customer uses for XML.
Well, I have a great workaround for that one. Mark Logic CEO Dave Kellogg has revved up what I think is the most interesting vendor-exec blog I’ve seen. So if you’re interested in search/publishing-style uses for native XML, I strongly encourage you to go browse his blog. (And he writes about a lot of other interesting stuff as well.)
| Categories: MarkLogic, Structured documents | 1 Comment |
IBM’s definition of native XML
IBM’s recent press release on Viper says:
Viper is expected to be the only database product able to seamlessly manage both conventional relational data and pure XML data without requiring the XML data to be reformatted or placed into a large object within the database.
That, so far as I know, is true, at least among major products.
I’m willing to apply the “native” label to Microsoft’s implementation anyway, because conceptually there’s little or no necessary performance difference between their approach and IBM’s. (Dang. I thought I posted more details on that months ago. I need to remedy the lack soon.)
As for Oracle — well, right now Oracle has a bit of a competitive problem …
| Categories: IBM and DB2, Microsoft and SQL*Server, Oracle, Structured documents | 1 Comment |
Oracle is getting touchy about XML
From Barbara Darrow’s “Unblog”:
“How we store XML on the database is, excuse me, none of your business. The point is you can write an app using XML standards,” said Mark Drake, manager of product management for XML technology for the Redwood Shores, Calif. vendor.
“Whether we shred it, parse it, it doesn’t matter. There is no such thing as a native XML storage model, there is no W3c standard or 11th stone tablet, telling us how,” he noted.
So implementation doesn’t matter? I.e., performance doesn’t matter?
That’s not generally Oracle’s viewpoint in areas where it has a performance or implementation advantage, or even parity …
| Categories: Oracle, Structured documents | 4 Comments |