彩乐乐|网站

  • <blockquote id="aoa84"></blockquote>
  • <blockquote id="aoa84"><samp id="aoa84"></samp></blockquote>
  • <blockquote id="aoa84"></blockquote>
    <blockquote id="aoa84"></blockquote>
  • <blockquote id="aoa84"></blockquote>
  • Microsoft and SQL*Server

    Microsoft’s efforts in the database management, analytics, and data connectivity markets. Related subjects include:

    August 17, 2017

    More notes on the transition to the cloud

    Last year I posted observations about the transition to the cloud. Here are some further thoughts.

    0. In case any doubt remained, the big questions about transitioning to the cloud are “When?” and “How?”. “Whether”, by way of contrast, is pretty much settled.

    1. The answer to “When?” is generally “Over many years”. In particular, at most enterprises the cloud transition will span multiple CIO’s tenure in their positions.

    Few enterprises will ever execute on simple, consistent, unchanging “cloud strategies”.

    2. The SaaS (Software as a Service) vs. on-premises tradeoffs are being reargued, except that proponents now spell SaaS C-L-O-U-D. (Ali Ghodsi of Databricks made a particularly energetic version of that case in a recent meeting.)

    3. In most countries (at least in the US and the rest of the West), the cloud vendors deemed to matter are Amazon, followed by Microsoft, followed by Google. And so, when it comes to the public cloud, Microsoft is much, much more enterprise-savvy than its key competitors.

    Read more

    October 3, 2016

    Notes on the transition to the cloud

    1. The cloud is super-hot. Duh. And so, like any hot buzzword, “cloud” means different things to different marketers. Four of the biggest things that have been called “cloud” are:

    Further, there’s always the idea of hybrid cloud, in which a vendor peddles private cloud systems (usually appliances) running similar technology stacks to what they run in their proprietary public clouds. A number of vendors have backed away from such stories, but a few are still pushing it, including Oracle and Microsoft.

    This is a good example of Monash’s Laws of Commercial Semantics.

    2. Due to economies of scale, only a few companies should operate their own data centers, aka true on-prem(ises). The rest should use some combination of colo, SaaS, and public cloud.

    This fact now seems to be widely understood.

    Read more

    August 28, 2016

    Are analytic RDBMS and data warehouse appliances obsolete?

    I used to spend most of my time — blogging and consulting alike — on data warehouse appliances and analytic DBMS. Now I’m barely involved with them. The most obvious reason is that there have been drastic changes in industry structure:

    Simply reciting all that, however, begs the question of whether one should still care about analytic RDBMS at all.

    My answer, in a nutshell, is:

    Analytic RDBMS — whether on premises in software, in the form of data warehouse appliances, or in the cloud — are still great for hard-core business intelligence, where “hard-core” can refer to ad-hoc query complexity, reporting/dashboard concurrency, or both. But they aren’t good for much else.

    Read more

    August 7, 2016

    Notes on DataStax and Cassandra

    I visited DataStax on my recent trip. That was a tipping point leading to my recent discussions of NoSQL DBAs and misplaced fear of vendor lock-in. But of course I also learned some things about DataStax and Cassandra themselves.

    On the customer side:

    Customers in large numbers want cloud capabilities, as a potential future if not a current need.

    One customer example was a large retailer, who in the past was awful at providing accurate inventory information online, but now uses Cassandra for that. DataStax brags that its queries come back in 20 milliseconds, but that strikes me as a bit beside the point; what really matters is that data accuracy has gone from “batch” to some version of real-time. Also, Microsoft is a DataStax customer, using Cassandra (and Spark) for the Office 365 backend, or at least for the associated analytics.

    Per Patrick McFadin, the four biggest things in DataStax Enterprise 5 are: Read more

    July 19, 2016

    Notes on vendor lock-in

    Vendor lock-in is an important subject. Everybody knows that. But few of us realize just how complicated the subject is, nor how riddled it is with paradoxes. Truth be told, I wasn’t fully aware either. But when I set out to write this post, I found that it just kept growing longer.

    1. The most basic form of lock-in is:

    2. Enterprise vendor standardization is closely associated with lock-in. The core idea is that you have a mandate or strong bias toward having different apps run over the same platforms, because:

    3. That last point is double-edged; you have more power over suppliers to whom you give more business, but they also have more power over you. The upshot is often an ELA (Enterprise License Agreement), which commonly works:

    Read more

    July 19, 2016

    Notes from a long trip, July 19, 2016

    For starters:

    A running list of recent posts is:

    Subjects I’d like to add to that list include:

    Read more

    May 18, 2016

    Governments vs. tech companies — it’s complicated

    Numerous tussles fit the template:

    As a general rule, what’s best for any kind of company is — pricing and so on aside — whatever is best or most pleasing for their customers or users. This would suggest that it is in tech companies’ best interest to favor privacy, but there are two important quasi-exceptions: Read more

    January 25, 2016

    Kafka and Confluent

    For starters:

    At its core Kafka is very simple:

    So it seems fair to say:

    Read more

    January 22, 2016

    Cloudera in the cloud(s)

    Cloudera released Version 2 of Cloudera Director, which is a companion product to Cloudera Manager focused specifically on the cloud. This led to a discussion about — you guessed it! — Cloudera and the cloud.

    Making Cloudera run in the cloud has three major aspects:

    Features new in this week’s release of Cloudera Director include:

    I.e., we’re talking about some pretty basic/checklist kinds of things. Cloudera Director is evidently working for Amazon AWS and Google GCP, and planned for Windows Azure, VMware and OpenStack.

    As for porting, let me start by noting: Read more

    December 31, 2015

    Oracle as the new IBM — has a long decline started?

    When I find myself making the same observation fairly frequently, that’s a good impetus to write a post based on it. And so this post is based on the thought that there are many analogies between:

    And when you look at things that way, Oracle seems to be swimming against the tide.

    Drilling down, there are basically three things that can seriously threaten Oracle’s market position:

    Oracle’s decline, if any, will be slow — but I think it has begun.

     

    Oracle/IBM analogies

    There’s a clear market lead in the core product category. IBM was dominant in mainframe computing. While not as dominant, Oracle is definitely a strong leader in high-end OTLP/mixed-use (OnLine Transaction Processing) RDBMS.

    That market lead is even greater than it looks, because some of the strongest competitors deserve asterisks. Many of IBM’s mainframe competitors were “national champions” — Fujitsu and Hitachi in Japan, Bull in France and so on. Those were probably stronger competitors to IBM than the classic BUNCH companies (Burroughs, Univac, NCR, Control Data, Honeywell).

    Similarly, Oracle’s strongest direct competitors are IBM DB2 and Microsoft SQL Server, each of which is sold primarily to customers loyal to the respective vendors’ full stacks. SAP is now trying to play a similar game.

    The core product is stable, secure, richly featured, and generally very mature. Duh.

    The core product is complicated to administer — which provides great job security for administrators. IBM had JCL (Job Control Language). Oracle has a whole lot of manual work overseeing indexes. In each case, there are many further examples of the point. Edit: A Twitter discussion suggests the specific issue with indexes has been long fixed.

    Niche products can actually be more reliable than the big, super-complicated leader. Tandem Nonstop computers were super-reliable. Simple, “embeddable” RDBMS — e.g. Progress or SQL Anywhere — in many cases just work. Still, if you want one system to run most of your workload 24×7, it’s natural to choose the category leader. Read more

    Next Page →

    Feed: DBMS (database management system), DW (data warehousing), BI (business intelligence), and analytics technology Subscribe to the Monash Research feed via RSS or email:

    Login

    Search our blogs and white papers

    Monash Research blogs

    User consulting

    Building a short list? Refining your strategic plan? We can help.

    Vendor advisory

    We tell vendors what's happening -- and, more important, what they should do about it.

    Monash Research highlights

    Learn about white papers, webcasts, and blog highlights, by RSS or email.

  • <blockquote id="aoa84"></blockquote>
  • <blockquote id="aoa84"><samp id="aoa84"></samp></blockquote>
  • <blockquote id="aoa84"></blockquote>
    <blockquote id="aoa84"></blockquote>
  • <blockquote id="aoa84"></blockquote>
  • search for

    Finance

    constellation

    game

    Finance

    search for

    news

    aviation

    search for