Skip to main content

Evaluating Exadata… Does it stack up with RDBMS-Hadoop systems? Part 2

In my earlier blog  I suggested that we could evaluate RDBMS-Hadoop integration architecture using three criteria:
  1. How parallel are the pipes to move data between the RDBMS and the parallel file system;
  2. Is there intelligence to push down predicates; and
  3. Is there more intelligence to push down joins and other relational operators?
But Exadata is a split RDBMS with a parallel file system backing it… how does it measure up by these criteria?
There are effective parallel pipes between the Oracle RAC RDBMS and the Exadata Storage Subsystem… so Exadata passes the first test. Further, Exadata is smart about pushing scan and projection both down to the Storage layer.
Unfortunately there is a fairly severe imbalance between the number of nodes on the RAC side and the number of nodes on the Storage side and this creates a bottleneck. We cannot give Exadata full marks here… but as far as parallel pipes goes it stacks up pretty well.
The ability to push down predicates goes a long way towards solving this as the predicate push-down reduces the amount of data that has to move over the bottleneck. But in every data warehouse there will be queries that return lots of rows from the early execution steps… and Exadata cannot join data in the Storage Subsystem so it tries to pull data up sparingly and push down semi-joins whenever possible… it just cannot be done in every case (Note: in Exadata POCs Oracle will try to ensure that no queries are included that pull lots of data up to the RAC layer… and competitors will try to include queries that expose this weakness…).
So… Oracle also includes some intelligence to push some data down to reduce data movement. There is no way to choose to move data from the RAC layer to the Storage Subsystem and execute the query there… the Storage Subsystem can only scan and project… so again we cannot give Exadata full marks… but it is pretty smart as you will see when we start looking at alternative implementations.
Finally, Exadata cannot effectively split a single query plan across both layers… so no marks at all here.
So Exadata is pretty good… but it has weak spots that will be severe for an important set of DW queries in any implementation.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Python and Parquet Performance

In Pandas, PyArrow, fastparquet, AWS Data Wrangler, PySpark and Dask. This post outlines how to use all common Python libraries to read and write Parquet format while taking advantage of  columnar storage ,  columnar compression  and  data partitioning . Used together, these three optimizations can dramatically accelerate I/O for your Python applications compared to CSV, JSON, HDF or other row-based formats. Parquet makes applications possible that are simply impossible using a text format like JSON or CSV. Introduction I have recently gotten more familiar with how to work with  Parquet  datasets across the six major tools used to read and write from Parquet in the Python ecosystem:  Pandas ,  PyArrow ,  fastparquet ,  AWS Data Wrangler ,  PySpark  and  Dask . My work of late in algorithmic trading involves switching between these tools a lot and as I said I often mix up the APIs. I use Pandas and PyArrow for in-RAM comput...
Post a Comment
Read more

How to construct a File System that lives in Shared Memory.

Shared Memory File System Goals 1. MOUNTED IN SHARED MEMORY The result is a very fast, real time file system. We use Shared Memory so that the file system is public and not private. 2. PERSISTS TO DISK When the file system is unmounted, what happens to it? We need to be able to save the file system so that a system reboot does not destroy it. A great way to achieve this is to save the file system to disk. 3. EXTENSIBLE IN PLACE We want to be able to grow the file system in place. 4. SUPPORTS CONCURRENCY We want multiple users to be able to access the file system at the same time. In fact, we want multiple users to be able to access the same file at the same time. With the goals now in mind we can now talk about the major design issues: FAT File System & Design Issues The  FAT File System  has been around for quite some time. Basically it provides a pretty good file structure. But I have two problems with it: 1. FAT IS NOT EXTENSIBLE IN PLAC...
Post a Comment
Read more

Fetching Facebook Friends using Windows Azure Mobile Services

This tutorial shows you how to fetch Facebook Friends if you have Facebook accessToken. Here is the the code for Scheduled task called getFriends function getFriends() { //Name of the table where accounts are stored var accountTable = tables.getTable('FacebookAccounts'); //Name of the table where friends are stored var friendsTable = tables.getTable('Friends'); checkAccounts(); function checkAccounts(){ accountTable .read({success: function readAccounts(accounts){ if (accounts.length){ for (var i = 0; i < accounts.length; i++){ console.log("Creating query"); //Call createQuery function for all of the accounts that are found createQuery(accounts[i], getDataFromFacebook); } } else { console.log("Didn't find any account"); prepareAccountTable(); } }}); } function prepareAccountTable(){ var myAccount = { accessToken: "", //enter here you facebook accessToken. You can retrieve ...
Post a Comment
Read more