sorted by: recent | see :
popular
Content Tagged relational
relational database storage vs XML based data storage
PostgreSQL can be used in a lot of different ways
The relational DBMS industry is filled with startups. In some way or other, most of them are based on or make use of the open source project PostgreSQL. (Not all, of course; exceptions include DATAllegro and Infobright, which are based on Ingres and MySQL respectively.) But how they use PostgreSQL varies greatly.
EnterpriseDB is at one extreme. It hired a number of the top PostgreSQL developers, and is widely credited in the industry for major enhancements in PostgreSQL 8.3. Look in the future for EnterpriseDB to be less “The Oracle-compatible database company” and more “The PostgreSQL company that offers great features, including Oracle compatibility.”
Vertica is at the other pole. I still have the impression that Vertica emulates PostgreSQL to gain various tool compatibility benefits. But upon checking I learned, to my surprise, that Vertica uses no actual PostgreSQL code whatsoever.
Greenplum is somewhere in between. Greenplum started from PostgreSQL, and said it was supporting something open source called Bizgres. But Seth Grimes calls Greenplum’s commitment to Bizgres into serious question. But then, given how silent Greenplum has been recently (some PR around an investment round excepted), I’m not sure what to think of anything I previously heard from the company.
Please subscribe to our feed!
Database
MySQL
management
systems
relational
--vertica
--enterprisedb
Database management system choices ? 4 categories of relational
This is the second of a five-part series on database management system choices. For the first post in the series, please click here.
For the most part, relational database management systems divide into four major classes:
- High-end OLTP (OnLine Transaction Processing) relational DBMS. Oracle is the flagship for this category, followed by DB2.
- Specialty data warehouse DBMS. Teradata is the leader here, followed by Netezza, DATAllegro, ParAccel, Vertica, Infobright, Greenplum, Kognitio, Sybase IQ, and a host of others.
- Mid-range relational database management systems. Most of the contenders here fall into one or more of three categories: Open-source-based relational DBMS (MySQL, PostgreSQL, EnterpriseDB); reseller-focused relational DBMS (Progress OpenEdge, Pervasive PSQL); or crippled ?editions? of high-end systems. Microsoft SQL Server was once a clear mid-range system, but now is better classified as high-end OLTP.
- Embedded relational database management systems. The leader of this category is Sybase’s SQL Anywhere. Also significant are memory-centric products Oracle TimesTen and solidDB.
High-end OLTP relational database management systems are complex and mature products, differentiated mainly on reliability, availability, performance, scalability, security, license cost, maintenance cost, programming/administration cost, and datatype support. All except the last point can be evaluated pretty effectively on an outside-in basis. That is, is suffices to look at proven results, without worrying a whole lot about architecture or product futures. Just remember that a lot of the high-end features come through extra-cost add-ins, which need to be included in any evaluation.
That said — most evaluations of high-end OLTP RDBMS are pretty moot anyway. Large enterprises usually have one favored vendor, who provides a significant quantity discount on license and maintenance costs. Using the OLTP RDBMS you already have also usually leads to significant efficiencies in administration expense. Thus, the high-end OLTP is the one part of the DBMS market that truly is as mature as conventional wisdom would have us believe ? at least, that is, until something like H-Store comes to fruition.
Even so, high-end relational OLTP DBMS vendors face two major competitive challenges, which are taking significant share of new applications within those vendors’ installed bases. For more about those, please see the next two posts in this series.
The complete series
- Part 1: Database management system choices ? overview
- Part 2: Database management system choices ? 4 categories of relational
- Part 3: Database management system choices ? relational data warehouse
- Part 4: Database management system choices ? mid-range-relational
- Part 5: Database management system choices ? beyond relational
Please subscribe to our feed!
The blogosphere writes about Sun buying MySQL
More from me soon, but first here is a survey of what other people are saying about Sun’s billion-dollar deal to acquire MySQL:
- Jeremy Cole, evidently a very experienced high-end MySQL user, itemizes some serious problems with MySQL — optimizer, memory management, replication, and so on. (Uh, Jeremy — what part of the product do you like?) He also echoes a theme I’ve seen elsewhere, and to some extent noticed myself; MySQL has had a lot of management issues as a company.
- Jeffrey McManus calls out Sun’s promise to continue to support non-Java programming languages in MySQL. Kaj Arnö of MySQL makes the point emphatically, reciting a list of operating systems and development environments/languages MySQL will continue to support.
- Matt Asay quite reasonably interprets Sun’s move as a bid for overall leadership and development of the open source software platform industry. I would add that Sun CEO Jonathon Schwartz came up through the software side of the business. I would further add that Sun has a dismal track record with closed-source software acquisitions, including Forte’, NetDynamics, and the enterprise side of Netscape.
- Matt also has selected quotes from the press conference, including Sun saying the coopetitionally obvious “Yeah, we’ll continue serious support for PostgreSQL and Oracle too.” Brian Aker also supports the PostgreSQL point.
- Zack Urlocker of MySQL implies that Jonathon Schwartz was very involved in the deal personally. That makes all kinds of sense.
- 451 Group has some interesting links, and don’t miss the short comment thread.
- The official MySQL and Sun company lines are summarized in this Zack Urlocker post on Infoworld (as well as some of the links above) and this post from Jonathon Schwartz of Sun.