rdbms industry and technology trends 2007

8/4/2019 RDBMS Industry and Technology Trends 2007

1/28

Copyright 2006 Quest Software

RDBMS Industry andtechnology trends

Guy Harrison

Chief Architect, Database Solutions


2/28

Review of market share and competitivelandscape

Open source and disruptive technology

Technical directions Grids & clusters

Self-managing databases

Application development technologies

Industry trends: Security and compliance

Outsourcing Globalization of data and the database

Visions for the future of the DBMS

Agenda


3/28


4/28


5/28

History of RDBMS competition

1990: Client server revolution Sybase vs. Ingres vs. Oracle Multi threaded servers (SMP support) Stored procedures/Client server capabilities

1996: Object Oriented Database distractions Informix vs. IBM vs. Oracle OODBMS vs. Object relational vs. relational

2000: Internet gold rush Internet and Java compatibility Best of breed configurations with EMC, Solaris & Oracle Infinite scale-up anticipated Oracle price gouging creates some drift to IBM and SQL Server

2005: ROI/ TCO/ Compliance Battle not over capability but over cost SQL Server disrupts Oracle but constrained by Windows OS

market Oracle disrupting IBM/MF and the high end via grid/RAC. IBM pursues enigmatic Information As A Service (IAAS) strategy


6/28

Market share and competitive landscape

2005 RDBMS market share

45%

21%

17%

17%

Oracle Corp.

IBM

Microsoft Corp.

Others

Source: IDC 2006

26%

22%

13%

12%

1%

0%

26%

Sybase Inc.

NCR Teradata

Progress Software Corp.

SAS Institute

M ySQL

Ingres Corp.

Fujitsu


7/28

Revenues by platform

0.00 500.00 1,000.00 1,500.00 2,000.00 2,500.00 3,000.00

Oracle

IBM

Microsoft

Other

Revenue($M)

2005 RDBMS revenues by platform

Unix

Windows

Linux

Mainframe

Other


8/28

Revenues by company size

SQLServer

SQLServer

SQLServer

SQLServer

SQLServer

Oracle

Oracle

Oracle

Oracle

Oracle

DB2

DB2

DB2

DB2

DB2

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Less than

$100 million

$100 million

to less than$500 million

$500 million to

less than$1 billion

$1 billion to

$10 billion

More than $10

billion

SQL Server Oracle DB2

Source: Forrester


9/28

Market growth by platform 2004 predictions

$0

$500

$1,000

$1,500

$2,000

$2,500

$3,000

$3,500

$4,000

$4,500

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008

Millions

Windows

Unix

Linux

Mainframe

Other

Source: IDC


10/28

Market growth by platform 2006 predictions

$0

$2,000

$4,000

$6,000

$8,000

$10,000

$12,000

$14,000

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

$M

Mainframe

UnixLinux/other open source

Windows 32 and 64

Linux+Unix

Other


11/28

Market share conclusions and speculations

Oracle continues to dominate non-mainframe RDBMS landscape.

However, most shops support >1 RDBMS type (Oracle/SQLServer)and DBA managers at least need to understand more than onetechnology

Growth of Windows as a server platform ensures a healthy growthtrend for SQL Server

Similarly, Oracle stands to be the main beneficiary from the growth ofLinux

No compelling reason to believe that either vendor is going to dominate

Server platform choices are key in RDBMS vendor decisions and vice-versa.

The above ignores the possibility of sudden disruption.


12/28

Disruptive technology

Disruptive innovation occurs when a technology ora technical approach emerges that offers a radicallycheaper way of meeting a need. Lower cost alternatives to low-end utilization

Lower cost creates new consumers

Established players are motivated to move towardsthe more profitable high-end of the market. Existing customers tend to demand features at the high end

High end has higher profit margins

High end is less effected by disruptive technology

But as both the established and disruptive

technologies advance, the established technologyovershoots while the disruptive technology gains

the mainstream. See The Innovators Dilemma, Clayton Christensen, HUP


13/28

Disruptive Technology

Functionality

Time

Functionality demanded at high end of market

Functionality demanded at low end of market

Sustaining

Technology

Disruptive

Technology

The Innovators Dilemma, Clayton Christensen,Harvard University Press


14/28

OSDBMS - MySQL

Advantages: Huge install base Many mission-critical deployments (Sabre, Yahoo, NASA, etc) Critical part of the LAMP stack

Well placed to leverage Linux server growth But dont forget WAMP

Disruptive both as low-cost innovation and competing against non-consumption

Providing 90s style RDBMS for free (internal) or


15/28

Industry trends - Outsourcing

15% of companies report they plan to outsource DBA roles

(Gartner 2004) b/c of: Reduced cost

Difficulty maintaining expertise in house

But BIG obstacles to widespread adoption: High risk (cost of database failure > savings from outsourcing)

Security implications Quality of service

Adoption is relatively narrow and shallow: Minority of companies (but tend to be large) outsourcing only routine DBA

activities


16/28

Industry trends - Security and compliance

A perfect storm accelerated interest in Databasesecurity: 9/11

The legislative response to Enron et al

Sarbanes-Oxley, HIPPA, VISA

High profile database break-ins, slammer worm, etc

Outsourcing (challenge of external DBAs).

Industry responses: Database Encryption

Vulnerability Assessment

Fine grained auditing

Intrusion detection and prevention Separation of duties: Privileges to administer a database do

not automatically imply privilege to view or alter data

Oracle leading in inbuilt security features


17/28

Industry TrendAutonomic / self managingcomputing

All vendors especially Oracle are motivated tocompete on ease of administration Oracle ADDM (Automatic Database Diagnostic Manager)

SQL Server DTA (Database Tuning Advisor)

UDB Leo (Learning Optimizer)

Evolutionary changes for the DBA

As legacy becomes automated, leading edge stillrequires intensive manual administration Oracle 10g RAC, for instance

Overall effect of automation will be to slightly reduceDBA market growth and to shift demand to higherend skills


18/28

Technical trends grids / utility computing

Computing resources (IO, storage, memory,CPU) allocated on demand across theenterprise Analogy to the electricity grid

Economic benefits will be irresistible once the

technical challenges overcome. Grids have been viable only for CPU-bound

applications until recently

To create a database-enabled grid we need:

A way to shift CPU/memory (eg blades) efficientlybetween databases

A way to shift IO & storage efficiently betweendatabases


19/28

Grids, RAC and VMs

Oracle RAC is a step towards CPU on demand for databases In some future release (possibly Oracle 11) blades will migrate between RAC

clusters on demand

ASM provides a disk-grid solution Although there are non-Oracle technologies that can achieve this in a

heterogenous manner

RAC and ASM are not quite there yet Nevertheless, RAC changes the economics of providing HA VLDB in a way that

competitors cannot currently address

Virtualization offers an alternative utility computing vision Resources can be shifted between VMs on demand

However, not able to migrate VMs across hosts instantaneously (so scalabilitylimited to size of single host)

Databases currently perform poorly inside VMs

Hypervisor technologies and Virtual-aware chipsets will possibly correct this


20/28

Blade Farm

Disk Farm (ASM?)

RAC Instance RAC InstanceRAC InstanceRAC InstanceRAC InstanceRAC InstanceRAC InstanceRAC Instance

Blade Rack Blade RackBlade RackBlade RackBlade Rack Blade RackBlade Rack

Disk

Disk Disk

Disk

Disk Disk Disk DiskDiskDisk Disk

Technical trends grids

Blade Farm

Disk Farm (ASM?)



Disk

Disk Disk

Disk

Disk Disk Disk DiskDiskDisk Disk

Blade Farm

Disk Farm (ASM)



Disk

Disk Disk

Disk

Disk Disk DiskDiskDisk

Disk

Disk

Disk

Disk


21/28

Technical trends Object-Relational Mapping

Increasing trend towards ORM Dominant paradigm in Java already (Hibernate)

Increasing in OSS (Ruby on Rails)

Emerging in .NET

Increasing prevalence in OSS and .NETenvironments (LINQ, Rails Active Record)

Obfuscation of relational data in some cases (esp.JDO)

Harder to perform Business Intelligence andAnalytical processing

Container generated SQL

Harder to tune & debug though often simpler

access paths Tendency towards over-simplified and/or

unnormalized data models to suit programmingmodels (ORMs tend to prefer single tableaccesses)

RDBMS vendors introducing tune without

change and secondary optimizers in response


22/28

Technology trends Application development

Multiple factors converging to reduce thesignificance of stored procedures in modernapplications: No standardization in stored procedure languages

Use of SPs increase RDBMS vendor lock-in

ORM ignores SPs

Packaged applications want to be heterogenous (exceptfor Oracle Fusion )

Middle tier a better choice for business logic

However: We still see strong growth in the PL/SQL development

tools market

Oracle is one of the big two ERP vendors and they dont

want to be heterogenous Middle tier/OO languages (and programmers!) not

optimized for data access


23/28

Drivers Because we can

Fine grained, real world data (RFID)

Longer term retention policies (Sarb-Ox,etc)

Complex and unstructured data (Flickr,YouTube)

Implications Scale out architectures increasingly more

attractive (unpredictable future demands)

Demand for archiving solutions

Suppresses disruptive effect of low endvendors

Less than

100 GB 12%

100 GB to499 GB 17%

500 GB toless than1 TB 24%

1 TB to lessthan 2 TB

7%

2 TB to5 TB 19%

More than5 TB 21%

Size of largest production databaseSource: Forrester (DBMS Survey 2006)

Data volume growth


24/28

Growing demand for data search and linking

Islands of information need to be broken down Motivations for globalising and unifying data:

RFID/Supply chain

Web services/mash-ups/co-operative e-commerce

Expectations raised by internet content search

But: No clear technical solution

Significant societal issues in respect of security andprivacy


25/28

Visions of the future of DBMS

Larry Ellison:

A single, global, logical (Oracle) instance/clustertied together with grids and data pump technology

Both data and computing resources will be madeavailable across the network on demand

Data sharing through consolidation

Web services standards bodies:

All interactions will occur through well-definedWeb Service interfaces utilizing specificspecifications such as WS-transaction, WS-security, etc.

RDBMS is a local persistence store only Open Source/Web 2.0 community:

Same as above, but mash-ups not Standards-based WS


26/28


Adam Bosworth (Google) Something radically different is going to emerge. Orders of magnitude more data is going to be stored

on the net in the near future and the expectation isgoing to be that we can find and possibly modify itfrom anywhere

Formal, tightly coupled web services will give way tosimple, sloppy (maybe RSS based) protocols

Matching will result not from a worldwidestandardization of data or a semantic web, but from

stupid but powerful algorithms (similar to Google spell

check) Centralized relational Databases of today are going to

seem so twentieth century and one of those

technologies that never got the internet


27/28


Michael Stonebraker (creator of Posgres/Ingres) etal One Size Fits All (OSFA) RDBMS architecture cannot meet

the needs of current and emerging demands:

OLTP, stream processing (telco, web), OLAP/DW,Unstructured, mobile, embedded, multi-dimensional, etc

Specialized databases can generated 10x performanceimprovements

For instance, column based organization instead of rowbased

The competing demand of data integration will probablypreclude a re-fragmentation of data

They suggest either: Hybrid system with various underlying storage engines

(a la MySQL)

Data federation

A new from scratch DBMS system with relational

features but also able to perform column based

operations


28/28

Questions?

rdbms industry and technology trends 2007

Documents