Slashdot Mirror
Oracle Promises 100x Faster DB Queries With New In-Memory Option
Hugh Pickens DOT Com writes "ZDNet reports that Oracle's Larry Elison kicked off Oracle OpenWorld 2013 promising a 100x speed-up querying OTLP database or data warehouse batches by means of a 'dual format' for both row and column in-memory formats for the same data and table. Using Oracle's 'dual-format in-memory database' option, every transaction is recorded in row format simultaneously with writing the same data into a columnar database. 'This is pure in-memory columnar technology,' said Ellison, explaining that means no logging and very little overhead on data changes while the CPU core scans local in-memory columns. Ellison followed up with the introduction of Oracle's new M6-32 'Big Memory Machine,' touted to be the fastest in-memory machine in the world, hosting 32 terabytes of DRAM memory and up to 384 processor cores with 8-threads per core."
Especially upwind, but not 100x
still Emirates Team NZ only need to win one more race..to take back the Americas cup
" hosting 32 terabytes of DRAM memory and up to 384 processor cores with 8-threads per core. "
Let me be the first to point out the Beowulf possibilities with a few hundred of these clustered together. :)
With increasing surveillance on American citizens such database will provide security forces with instant profile of each person. Let's combine that with license plate scanning, cell phone tracking, sexual preferences and health records.
Now we can sleep well at night, our children are safe.
"Big Memory Machine"... So, they finally built Deepthought?
In-memory IO is grand, when that's your're bottleneck. Mine tends to be in the network level, so I use a local daemon for query result caching at the application level as "in-memory" speedup. The speedups are nice, but pricey. Color me unimpressed -- that's pink, BTW; I'm a Caucasoid your colors may vary, but only up to VARCHAR(20);
Uhg. Is "in memory" now just another buz-word? I guess we've come full circle back to Mainframe? Big memory banks are faster and better for a while, but then the bandwidth goes up and the price, reliability and scalability will favor distributed systems (as currently). I wonder which phase of the cycle quantum computing will favor: distributed / localized? You have to take into consideration your user distribution too...
So, eventually you'll want a hybrid system where the memory is distributed and cloned at each query-able interface, but still maintaining the entire dataset "in memory"...
...
SELECT * FROM earth WHERE answer LIKE "everything";
42 rows returned
As long as they keep with the extorsion techniques Oracle is famous for they can keep their hardware.
Wow, just catching up to Microosft. like SQL Server In-Memory OLTP http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/dn133186(v=sql.120).aspx
And Column Store Indexes released 2 years ago. http://blog.sqlauthority.com/2011/10/29/sql-server-fundamentals-of-columnstore-index/
First, let me say that I would love to have a table option to keep a particularly heavily-hit table always in memory.
This ain't it.
From TFA, "Maintaining those indexes is expensive and slows down transaction processing. Let's get rid of them," Ellison remarked. "Let's throw all of those analytic indexes away and replace the indexes with in-memory column sort."
This merely minimizes the penalties of poor indexing and RBAR by making complete table scans on arbitrary columns faster. Apparently Mr. Ellison has forgotten his algoithmics and combinatorics - Oh, wait, no he didn't, he dropped out as a sophmore. Pity, because had he stayed, he would have learned that even with a 1000x slower storage medium, an O(log N) algorithm (index seek) will eventually beat an O(N log N) algorithm (column sort).
Thanks, Larry, but you want to make Oracle faster? Remove cursors from the core language, and although that alone won't "fix" it, you'll see all the hacks who can't think in set-based logic drop out overnight.
whats OTLP?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SAP_HANA
14 hours ago, itnews.com.au runs a story (promptly picked up by /.) about how the social networks are staying with MySQL. In the article, it is suggested that the switch to MariaDB by some Linux distros is a "political move", and that Google's switch might be a retaliation against an unrelated lawsuit from Oracle. Also, it's mentioned (twice, with the same wording) that the Mozilla foundation is "upgrading from MariaDB to MySQL 5.6" (emphasis added).
7 hours ago, itnews.com.au runs a story (promptly picked up by /.) about how Oracle's 12C database will be 100x faster, despite the fact that we only have Oracle's CEO word for it.
Now that's what I call an Oracle-friendly site (or two?)
Knowledge is power; knowledge shared is power lost.
Just you hope Oracle maintains the batteries properly, especially since an emergency save-to-disk is going to take more than a few minutes...
"A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
Now if we just put a few of those in a beowolf cluster...
Columnstore databases such as MonetDB and their commercial spinoff Vectorwise (now Actian) already showed this can be achieved with open source and proprietary code.
Support Eachother, Copy Dutch Property!
= the GPU on an AMD A10
Ellison followed up with the introduction of Oracle's new M6-32 'Big Memory Machine,' touted to be the fastest in-memory machine in the world, hosting 32 terabytes of DRAM memory and up to 384 processor cores with 8-threads per core."
This should be on my desk in about 4 years.
Take the cheese to sickbay, the doctor should see it as soon as possible - B'Elanna Torres, "Learning Curve"
IBM had something like this in Mainframes back in the 80s with DB2 and Hyperspaces. Back then I recall management wondering what they'd do with it.
Harrison's Postulate - "For every action there is an equal and opposite criticism"
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Huh? ECC corrects 1-bit errors and detects >1-bit errors. There is no corruption. Stop the nonsense and get off the crack pipe.
So a 32GB RAM stick costs ~$1000. 32TB of RAM would cost $1,024,000. Given that RAM is about 1/4 of typical system build costs. This system costs about $4M raw. Oracle's markup is easily 1000% so $40M for this beast. And then the yearly licensing cost for Oracle at $2500/core: ~$1M.
At that cost you could probably develop your own MemCache/BDB cluster.
Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
ECC often detects and corrects errors, but it's not perfect, but then neither is the checksum in FC or iSCSI reads. They all have issues at this scale. Not a problem with the concept, just with implementations that saw 2^32 as a big number.
Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
So...in memory database = a fancy new term for a database that's (essentially) loaded onto a giant ram-disc?
As an added bonus I'm pretty sure that option would save you a mint in licensing fees.
Let's say you're actually deploying this system to full effectiveness, where you're using 96TB of RAM and depending on the speed increase that gives you. You are going to be so screwed if you ever reboot that thing. Cache refill after restart is a huge headache even on systems with 96 GB of RAM. If one of these monster servers goes down, I could see it taking a good chunk of a day to read everything back into cache again--during which the server is running at a tiny fraction of its regular rate.
There's a new SSD twist to this class of problem popping up more lately too. When SSDs wear out, they will sometimes quietly lose data. People doing SSD endurance testing with Anvil's tool stop the system periodically to see if it still works after being powered off for a bit. That's how some overused SSDs die at the end, and it's seriously ugly.