Blog: Colin White Subscribe to this blog's RSS feed!

Colin White

I like the various blogs associated with my many hobbies and even those to do with work. I find them very useful and I was excited when the Business Intelligence Network invited me to write my very own blog. At last I now have somewhere to park all the various tidbits that I know are useful, but I am not sure what to do with. I am interested in a wide range of information technologies and so you might find my thoughts will bounce around a bit. I hope these thoughts will provoke some interesting discussions.

About the author >

Colin White is the founder of BI Research and president of DataBase Associates Inc. As an analyst, educator and writer, he is well known for his in-depth knowledge of data management, information integration, and business intelligence technologies and how they can be used for building the smart and agile business. With many years of IT experience, he has consulted for dozens of companies throughout the world and is a frequent speaker at leading IT events. Colin has written numerous articles and papers on deploying new and evolving information technologies for business benefit and is a regular contributor to several leading print- and web-based industry journals. For ten years he was the conference chair of the Shared Insights Portals, Content Management, and Collaboration conference. He was also the conference director of the DB/EXPO trade show and conference.

Editor's Note: More articles and resources are available in Colin's BeyeNETWORK Expert Channel. Be sure to visit today!

ParAccel, one of the new analytic DBMS vendors, recently announced some impressive TPC-H benchmark results. A good review of these results can be found on Merv Adrian's blog at this link.

Not everyone agreed with Merv's balanced review. Curt Monash commented that "The TPC-H benchmark is a blight upon the industry." See his blog entry at this link.

This blog entry resulted in some 41 (somewhat heated) responses. At one point Curt made some negative comments about ParAccel's VP of Marketing, Kim Stanick, which in turn led to accusations that his blog entry was influenced by personal feelings.

I have two comments to make about this controversy. The first concerns the TPC-H benchmark and the second is about an increasing lack of social networking etiquette by analysts.

TPC benchmarks have always been controversial. People often argue that that do not represent real life workloads. What this really means is that you mileage may vary. These benchmarks are expensive to run and vendors throw every piece of technology at the benchmark in order to get good results. Some vendors are rumored to have even added special features to their products to improve the results. The upside of the benchmarks is that they are audited and reasonably well documented.

The use of TPC benchmarks has slowed over recent years. This is not only because they are expensive to run, but also because they have less marketing impact than in the past. In general, they have been of more use to hardware vendors because they demonstrate hardware scalability and provide hardware price/performance numbers. Oracle was perhaps an exception here because they liked to run full-page advertisements saying they were the fastest database system in existence.

TPC benchmarks do have some value to both the vendor and the customer. The benefits to the vendor are are increased visibility and credibility. Merv Adrian described this as a "rite of passage." It helps the vendor get on the short list. For the customer these benchmarks show the solution to be credible and scalable. All products work well in PowerPoint, but the TPC benchmarks demonstrate that the solution is more than just vaporware.

I think most customers are knowledgeable enough to realize that the benchmark may not match their own workloads or scale as well in their own environments. This is where the proof of concept (POC) benchmark comes in. The POC enables the customer to evaluate the product using their own workloads.

TPC benchmarks are not perfect, but they do provide some helpful information in the decision making process.

I will address the issue of blog etiquette in a separate blog entry.  



Posted June 25, 2009 1:43 PM
Permalink | 4 Comments |

4 Comments

Colin, good post -- the personal stuff was a bit over the top but hey, shit happens as we say in France :)

I basically share the same opinion though as expressed in my blog

http://jeromepineau.blogspot.com

Best,
J.

I thought you said "c'est la vie." I guess a middle road may be "merde happens." Enjoyed your blog. A good summary and balanced viewpoint. I sometimes regret starting these discussions because they can get of out control. Colin.

Colin, thanks for the mention, and the typically lucid review. One key point I made that is not discussed here: the TPC benchmarks do still have some marketing value, although I agree with your assertion that it's cooled down somewhat. From that perspective, I called ParAccel's publication a "coup." They are tiny, and their ability to mount a benchmark depended on a great deal of invested time and the willingness of a hardware partner to kick in the equipment. They pulled it off, got a result that for the moment outstrips everyone else, and get a ton of publicity among folks like us who watch these things. Now, if they can translate that into leads and close some, it will have been a coup indeed.

Colin,

Some information at http://hypecycles.wordpress.com/2009/07/01/tpch-chart-comparisons/ seems to indicate that the original assertions by Curt may not have been accurate.

Your thoughts please.

CJ

Leave a comment