Also not surprisingly, according to the official list, he's in pretty good company.
Congratulations to Foster and everyone else at Dataupia on the well-deserved accolade. Dataupia would have a real shot at winning.
In this article from Information Week, editor John Foley writes:
Unlike some competing products, Dataupia's data warehouse appliance doesn't have its own database management system. Instead, Dataupia's appliance, called Satori Server, performs analysis on data stored in existing databases.
This doesn't even pass the Common Sense Test. How can a data warehouse appliance not have its own database management system? How can a data warehouse appliance magically work "on data storage in existing database"? It can't, obviously. (If it did it would be called an "application".) You may access the Satori Server through another database rather than connecting directly to it, but that doesn't mean it doesn't have its own database management system. Hell, it IS its own database management system, for crying out loud.
The kicker is that CTO John O'Brien directly contradicts Foley's assertion in the recorded interview that's included in the article.
Simply unbelievable. my last post: Dataupia has already announced compatibility with "others", namely SQL Server and DB2. Well, maybe announced is the wrong word - I don't remember seeing an announcement, but they aren't hiding it either. From their Product Overview page:
Omniversal Transparency™ — Supports applications running on Oracle, Microsoft SQL Server, and DB2 databases natively. Accepts data from a range of legacy systems (including mainframe), making previously isolated data available for reporting and mainstream analytics.
Now, as far as I'm aware, they're the first company to support all three major RDBMSs. That's huge.
But since I'm never satisfied with anything, here's a thought: it would be a real coup if Dataupia added MySQL support as well (via a MySQL storage engine plug-in, of course). Talk about taking data warehousing to the masses! And they may be uniquely positioned to do that, both as a matter of technology and cost.
Crazy, maybe, but possible. And fun to think about.
this article, Phillip Howard asks:
...here's an interesting question: if EnterpriseDB's main claim to fame is that you can run Oracle applications without change against Postgres Plus Advanced Server; and if Dataupia makes the same claim with respect to data warehousing, then can you run Dataupia against Postgres Plus Advanced Server?
I'm no Dataupia expert, but it seems pretty clear to me that the answer is no. The reason is very simple: EnterpriseDB's offering is a stand-alone database system that acts like Oracle, while Dataupia's system is a transparent system accessed through Oracle. (Or others, but I shan't spill any specific beans.) Both are Oracle compatible, just not in the same way.
And for that matter, ParAccel will be able to make the same claim (Oracle compatibility) before too long. Yet they achieve it in an entirely different way - query routing with their "AMIGO mode" option.
In summary: Not all Oracle-compatible systems are compatible in the same way. Don't get carried away with possible combinations. Dataupia today. Very cool, and very fast. I swear some of the results were displayed before the mouse button had been released. It was a good testament to the power of their Dynamic Aggregation Engine.
Said demo is expected to be on display, and potentially even user-accessible, at the TWDI World Conference next month. If you're going to be there I recommend you check it out.