IBM and DB2
Analysis of IBM and various of its product lines in database management, analytics, and data integration.
- Cognos
- solidDB
- (in The Monash Report) Operational and strategic issues for IBM
- (in Text Technologies) IBM in the text analytics market
- (in Software Memories) Historical notes on IBM
- (in Software Memories) Historical notes on Informix
Large DB2 data warehouses on Linux (and AIX)
I was consulting recently to a client that needs to build really big relational data warehouses, and also is attracted to native XML. Naturally, I suggested they consider DB2. They immediately shot back that they were Linux-based, and didn’t think DB2 ran (or ran well) on Linux. Since IBM often leads with AIX-based offerings in its marketing and customer success stories, that wasn’t a ridiculous opinion. On the other hand, it also was very far from what I believed.
So I fired some questions at IBM, Read more
| Categories: Data warehousing, IBM and DB2 | Leave a Comment |
IBM’s mid-range OLTP offering gets strengthened
In the past, when I’ve asked Jeff Jones of IBM for permission to post one of his well-written notes, his response has pretty much been “Of course! Why did you bother asking?” So this time I’m just going ahead and skipping that step. The note is about IBM’s mid-range flavor of DB2, targeted directly at MySQL.
Today, IBM announced that its popular DB2 9 Express-C software is now available with an optional low-cost yearly support subscription. DB2 Express-C has been available without license charges for downloading, application development, deployment and redistribution since January 2006. It remains available without license charges for those that do not require support. Electronic general availability of the new support option is scheduled for June 1, 2007.
The new DB2 Express-C support option provides 24×7 product support, regular fixpacks and upgrade protection. In addition, this option provides support for high availability clustering, offsite disaster recovery, and data replication with remote data servers without additional charge.
Background
— Subscriptions are priced at $2,995 (U.S.) per server per year. This is identical to MySQL Enterprise Gold, but DB2 Express-C includes features not found in MySQL including pureXML support, high availability clustering (MySQL Cluster support costs extra), autonomic features, and no-charge administration and development tools. Unlike the free offerings from Microsoft and Oracle, DB2 Express-C does not place limits on the size or number of databases managed. With up to 4 GB of memory and up to 2 processors, DB2 Express-C can run on more powerful servers, can scale higher and can perform faster than its competitors. Read more
| Categories: IBM and DB2, Mid-range, MySQL, OLTP | Leave a Comment |
MySQL/IBM — will everybody please calm down?
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 more
| Categories: IBM and DB2, Mid-range, MySQL, OLTP, Open source | 4 Comments |
Naming the DBMS disruptors
Edit: This post has largely been superseded by this more recent one defining mid-range relational DBMS.
I find myself defining a new product category – midrange OLTP/multipurpose DBMS. (Or just midrange DBMS for brevity.) Nothing earthshaking here; I’m simply referring to those products that: Read more
Word of the day: “Compression”
IBM sent over a bunch of success stories recently, with DB2’s new aggressive compression prominently mentioned. Mike Stonebraker made a big point of Vertica’s compression when last we talked; other column-oriented data warehouse/mart software vendors (e.g. Kognitio, SAP, Sybase) get strong compression benefits as well. Other data warehouse/mart specialists are doing a lot with compression too, although some of that is governed by please-don’t-say-anything-good-about-us NDA agreements.
Compression is important for at least three reasons:
- It saves disk space, which is a major cost issue in data warehousing.
- It saves I/O, which is the major performance issue in data warehousing.
- In well-designed systems, it can actually make on-chip execution faster, because the gains in memory speed and movement can exceed the cost of actually packing/unpacking the data. (Or so I’m told; I haven’t aggressively investigated that claim.)
When evaluating data warehouse/mart software, take a look at the vendor’s compression story. It’s important stuff.
EDIT: DATAllegro claims in a note to me that they get 3-4x storage savings via compression. They also make the observation that fewer disks ==> fewer disk failures, and spin that — as it were 🙂 — into a claim of greater reliability.
| Categories: Data warehouse appliances, Data warehousing, Database compression, DATAllegro, IBM and DB2, SAP AG, Vertica Systems | 3 Comments |
The five flavors of DB2
I asked Jeff Jones of IBM to explain the various DB2 code lines to me. His answer was so clear that I asked further permission to post it verbatim. Here it is. The main takeaway is that one shouldn’t confuse the shared-everything z/OS (mainframe) version with the more loosely-coupled Unix/Linux/Windows version.
1. DB2 9 for z/OS (CAM note: i.e., mainframe) is a unique code base designed in cooperation with and integrated tightly with the operating system (z/OS) and the hardware (System z). That said, our development and administration tools (the externals of the product), as well as the SQL language supported, are built to be nearly the same across DB2 platforms. DB2 9 for z/OS has a shared-resource architecture similar to Oracle RAC. Parallel Sysplex and other specialized System z hardware enable this high performance, high reliability scenario (that even Oracle has said is well built). Born in 1983.
2. DB2 9 for Linux, UNIX and Windows is a second unique code base. (CAM note: i.e., “open systems”) Roughly 10% of that code base is reserved for platform-specific code to optimize to threading, security, clustering etc. across Linux (quite a few), UNIX (AIX, Solaris, HP-UX) and Windows (many versions). This code base is designed for portability given that we don’t own the underlying hardware in all cases (as we do for DB2 on System z). Much tooling is shared across the other DB2 platforms. Born in 1993.
http://ibm.com/db2/9
http://ibm.com/software/data/db2/linux/validate < --- Linux platforms supported NOTE: DB2 for Linux runs on all four IBM servers (System z, System p, System i and System x), same code base. Read more
| Categories: IBM and DB2 | 2 Comments |
Opportunities for disruption in the OLTP database management market (deck-clearing post #2)
The standard Clayton Christensen “Innovator’s Dilemma” disruption narrative goes something like this:
- Market leaders have many advantages, including top technology.
- Followers come up with good technology too.
- The leaders stay ahead by making their products ever better and more complex.
- The followers sell into new or non-mainstream markets, at prices the leaders can’t match. So they dominate new markets.
- Old markets turn into low-margin commodity-fests.
- Old leaders are screwed.
And it’s really hard for market leaders to avert this sad fate, because the short- and intermediate-term margin hit would be too great.
I think the OLTP DBMS market is ripe for that kind of disruption – riper than commentators generally realize. Here are some key potential drivers:
Read more
OLTP database management system market – the consensus isn’t ALL wrong (deck-clearing post #1)
Most of what I’ve written lately about database management seems to have been focused on analytic technologies. But I have a lot to say on the OLTP (OnLine Transaction Processing) side too. So let’s start by clearing the decks. Here’s a list of some consensus views that I in essence agree with:
- Oracle is the top of the line, and has nothing wrong with it other than cost of ownership and the non-joys of doing business with Oracle Corporation.
- DB2/mainframe is a fine product, but only if you like IBM mainframes.
- DB2/open systems is another fine product, but it’s hard to think of reasons to use it over Oracle.
- Microsoft SQL Server has great cost of ownership if you’re a Windows (server) shop anyway, especially on the administrative side. It does most but not all of what Oracle does.
- Sybase Adaptive Server Enterprise is a lot like SQL Server, but without the Windows dependence or the great Microsoft tools. If you have it installed or are Chinese, you should strongly consider using it, but otherwise there are better alternatives.
- Progress’ DBMS is great if you don’t need any of the features it’s missing. Administration, for example, is a super-low-cost breeze. But why use it unless you’re also using the Progress development tools?
- Intersystems’ Cache’ is another fine mid-range product that involves buying into the vendors’ whole tool set – all the more so because it isn’t relational.
- Small-footprint embedded DBMS, from vendors such as Sybase’s iAnywhere division or Solid Information Technologies, are off in their own little world. Mainly, that world is telecom, with a satellite in medical devices, although other kinds of networked equipment also sometimes use these products.
- IBM’s non-DB2 database management products – IMS, Informix, etc. – are fine things to stick with until you have to change. Ditto products from Software AG, Computer Associates, Cincom, etc.
- MySQL Version 4 is an OLTP joke, but it’s a joke many people share. (Hey — a lot of blogs, including mine, run on WordPress and MySQL 4.)
- Until Ingres is meaningfully marketed and sold outside its installed base, it’s not worth worrying about.
- PostgreSQL is more significant as the underpinning of other products — mainly EnterpriseDB in the OLTP space — than it is in its own right.
Really big databases
Business Intelligence Lowdown has a well-dugg post listing what it claims are the 10 largest databases in the world. The accuracy leaves much to be desired, as is illustrated by the fact that #10 on the list is only 20 terabytes, while entirely unmentioned is eBay’s 2-petabyte database (mentioned here, and also here). Read more
| Categories: Data warehouse appliances, Data warehousing, DATAllegro, Greenplum, IBM and DB2, Netezza, Oracle, SAS Institute, Teradata, Theory and architecture | 4 Comments |
Data warehouse appliance hardware strategies
Recently, I’ve done extensive research into the hardware strategies of computing appliance vendors, across multiple functional areas. Data warehousing, firewall/unified threat management, antispam, data integration – you name it, I talked to them. Of course, each vendor has a unique twist. But some architectural groupings definitely emerged.
The most common approaches seem to be:
Type 1: Custom assembly from off-the-shelf parts. In this model, the only unusual (but still off-the-shelf) parts are usually in the area of network acceleration (or occasionally encryption). Also, the box may be balanced differently than standard systems, in terms of compute power and/or reliability.
Type 2 (Virtual): We don’t need no stinkin’ custom hardware. In this model, the only “appliancy” features are in the areas of easy deployment, custom operating systems, and/or preconfigured hardware.
And of course there are also appliances of Type 0: Custom hardware including proprietary ASICs or FPGAs.
Different markets had different emphases; e.g., firewall appliances are typically Type 1, while antispam devices cluster in Type 2. But the data warehouse appliance market is highly diverse, which maybe shouldn’t be a surprise. After all, the revenue market leader is non-appliance software vendor Oracle, while noisy upstart Netezza is famous for its FPGA. Read more
| Categories: Data warehouse appliances, Data warehousing, DATAllegro, Greenplum, IBM and DB2, Kognitio, Netezza, Teradata | 8 Comments |