The Era of Microsoft on Windows-Only Is Over – OMG

Written by Donald Feinberg and Merv Adrian

On 25-Sep-2017 at Ignite, Microsoft announced general availability of SQL Server 2017, now supporting both Windows and Linux platforms, as well as support for containers. It can now book revenue for a product already widely used by early release customers.

What does this imply for the $34.4 billion database management system (DBMS) Market? Over the years, Microsoft has grown SQL Server revenue substantially, capturing over 20 percent of the DBMS market without a Linux offering. Few thought we would see the day where a major Microsoft software product would run on anything other than Windows.

Microsoft SQL Server started life as Sybase SQL Server. In 1988, Microsoft acquired joint rights on x86 and called it SQL Server. In 1993, the partnership was dissolved and Microsoft retained SQL Server and developed it independently of Sybase, running on x86 and Windows OS. SAP ASE, formerly Sybase ASE, (Sybase was acquired by SAP in 2010) shares the procedural language Transact-SQL (T-SQL) with SQL Server.

Linux support has been a long time in coming. Both of us were in (separate) meetings at Microsoft 10 or 12 years ago, where we suggested that SQL Server be ported to Linux. The notion was met by the senior management of the then Server & Tools Group (STG) with strong disagreement (and several “expletives deleted.”). Our premise then – and still – was that this would position SQL Server as a portable DBMS, boosting sales, offering more addressable market to compete in. Customers would know they could move to Linux if desired, removing the notion of lock-in to the Windows Server OS.

Today, SQL Server runs on Windows and Linux – and containers (Docker and Kubernetes), putting it on an equal footing with other DBMS products. It supports Availability Groups that span both OSs, enhancing cross-OS testing and migration projects. Microsoft claims over 2 million Docker pulls of SQL Server 2017 for Linux since November 2016. With the generally lower pricing of SQL Server, including availability on-premises with a subscription instead of a license + maintenance, as well as pricing and discount programs including a joint marketing program with Red Hat (see Microsoft’s press release), we expect increased competition with other relational DBMS players, like IBM Db2Oracle and SAP ASE.

The momentum is clear. Gartner Software Market numbers show that Microsoft passed IBM in total DBMS revenues in 2014 and is now second only to Oracle. In 2016 overall DBMS revenues grew at 7.7 percent and Microsoft grew at 10.3 percent, strengthening its #2 position, while Oracle grew 3.3 percent – off a much larger base that includes the Linux workloads Microsoft did not compete for. With a competitively priced product that is now portable across more than one operating system, Microsoft SQL Server is positioned to gain even more market share. To further support this, SQL Server on-premises is now fully compatible to Azure SQL Database, allowing customers full flexibility in choosing the desired platform, using on-premises SQL Server licenses for Azure deployments. Its on-premises subscription pricing positions it competitively with open-source RDBMS products, with no upfront license fees. In the year ahead, competition will be more heated than is has been for years.

Google Cloud Spanner Enters With a Splash

This post was authored by Rick Greenwald, Merv Adrian and Donald Feinberg

Last week, Google launched its internal Cloud Spanner DBMS into a public beta. Claiming to be both strongly consistent (like a relational DBMSs) and horizontally scalable (like NoSQL DBMSs), Cloud Spanner’s internal use has given Google time to exploit unique physical characteristics of its cloud.

–more–

Symposium Notes – Day Four Returns to Data Security, and to Hadoop

Thursday, the final day, reinforced a theme for the week: data security is heating up, and organizations are not ready. It came up in half of today’s final 10 meetings.

“Is my data more secure, or less, in the cloud?”

“Does using open source software for data management compromise how well I can protect it?”

“I’m a public utility – can I put meter data in the cloud safely? What about if it is used to drive actions at the edge?”

“I’m using drones for mapping and the data is in the cloud – am I exposed?”

–more–

DBMS 2015 Numbers Paint a Picture of Slow but Steady Change

Gartner recently published “Market Share: All Software Markets, Worldwide, 2015” (for clients) and the story the DBMS data tells continues themes we have been observing for some time in the market. Overall, the DBMS space continued to grow in high single digits, coming in at $35.9 Billion in US dollars – an 8.7% growth over the prior year’s $33.1 Billion, which itself represented growth of 8.9% over 2013. The picture is changing, and though the effects are just beginning to be significant, they will grow substantially through this decade.

more

Strata Standards Stories: Different Stores For Different Chores

Has HDFS joined MapReduce in the emerging “legacy Hadoop project” category, continuing the swap-out of components that formerly answered the question “what is Hadoop?” Stores for data were certainly a focus at Strata/Hadoop World in NY, O’Reilly’s well-run, well-attended, and always impactful fall event. The limitations of HDFS, including its append-only nature, have become inconvenient enough to push the community to “invent” something DBMS vendors like Oracle did decades ago: a bypass. After some pre-event leaks about its arrival, Cloudera chose its Strata keynote to announce Kudu, a new columnstore written in C++, bypassing HDFS entirely. Kudu will use an Apache license and will be submitted to the Apache process at some undetermined future time.

more

Perspectives on Hadoop Part Two: Pausing Plans

By Merv Adrian and Nick Heudecker 

In the first post in this series , I looked at the size of revenue streams for RDBMS software and maintenance/support and noted that they amount to $33B, pointing out that pure play Hadoop vendors had a high hill to climb. (I didn’t say so specifically, but in 2014, Gartner estimates that the three leading vendors generated less than $150M.)

In this post, Nick and I turn from Procurement to Plans and examine the buying intentions uncovered in Gartner surveys.

 

–more in Gartner blog–

Perspectives on Hadoop: Procurement, Plans, and Positioning

I have the privilege of working for the world’s leading information technology research and advisory company, covering information management with a strong focus for the past few years on an emerging software stack called Hadoop. In the early part of 2015, that particular technology is moving from early adopter status to early majority in its marketplace adoption. The discussions and published work around it have been exciting and controversial, so in this post (and a couple to follow) I describe three interlocking research perspectives on Hadoop: procurement (counting real money actually spent); plans (surveys of intentions to invest) and positioning (subjective interpretations of what the first two mean.)

Procurement Perspective: Hadoop is a (Very) Small Market Today

–more on Gartner blog–

 

 

Which SQL on Hadoop? Poll Still Says “Whatever” But DBMS Providers Gain

Since Nick Heudecker and I began our quarterly Hadoop webinars, we have asked our audiences what they expected to do about SQL several times, first in January 2014. With 164 respondents in that survey, 32% said “we’ll use what our existing BI tool provider gives us,” reflecting the fact that most adopters seem not to want to concern themselves overmuch with the details.

–More on my Gartner blog

Prediction Is Hard – Especially About the Future

OK, I admit it – I stole the title from a much smarter man. I thought that man was Yogi Berra, but maybe not – more about that at the end of this post.

Every year, Gartner issues a series of Predicts documents. This year I had the pleasure of doing one for my team on Information Infrastructure Technology. Now, I’m a software guy, and the team I’m on is all software people, so a document assigned to our team would typically be about – well, information software technology. But that would have missed the point rather dramatically, so I connected with a few colleagues and got their OK to use some of their predictions in the small set any document can include.

— more on Gartner blog —

DBMS Legacies are Very Sticky

Donald Feinberg (@Brazingo) & Merv Adrian (@merv)

Every so often, there’s a wave of interest in the “imminent retirement” of one or more legacy database management systems (DBMS). Usually, it’s because someone with very little knowledge of the actual use and distribution of the products becomes enthusiastic about someone’s sales pitch, or an anecdote or two. Sometimes it’s the result of a “replacement” marketing campaign by a competitor. And so far, it’s usually as illusive- and as far off – as the “death of the mainframe”.

Recently, a financial analyst report stated that in 2015, the industry would begin retiring Sybase products (owned now by SAP) and Informix (owned now by IBM). We and our colleagues have since had several inquiries about this and our response is simple: poppycock. DBMS market data, and our thousands of interactions with customers, do not support any of this.

—more on my Gartner blog–