Conference ulysse::rdb_vms_competition

    Re. -1

    It was a very thorough report on SYBASE, except that I feel it is
    a little bias toward RDB.  I work in the New York office and, to
    be honest, RDB is not selling too well here, or not as well as
    it should be.  Our customers are constantly asking us for an 
    alternative, so I have to look at other third party packages
    in a more objective manner.  Actually, I think product management
    and engineering should also examine our competitor by asking
    ourselves, "in which areas are they better?" rather than just
    searching for deficiencies in other products to boost our egos.
    It is always easier to say we are better than to say we need
    some improvements.  Therefore, let me be the devil, and respond
    to some of the criticisms.  Also, I want to let you know that
    I have worked in ACMS development for a few years before I
    came down here, so I am very pro-VIA in general.
    
    I was involved with SYBASE because one of my customer read
    some of their propaganda in a trade journal, so they want to
    see if SYBASE can solve their problems.  I read the SYBASE manuals
    and visited the SYBASE corporate office at Berkley two weeks ago.
    We met with a whole gang of their managers, including Mark Hoffman, 
    SYBASE's President, and Robert Esptein their Exec. VP who is 
    also the chief designer of SYBASE.  My customer will get a copy
    of SYBASE in August to run some performance tests and do some
    detailed features evaluation.

    Overall, I think SYBASE is a good product.  It showed excellent
    performance when I played with it on their MicroVAX.  It did
    512 insertions in about 18 CPU seconds and with less than 300 I/O's!
    I didn't look at the elapse time because it was running on
    a timesharing VAX with about 20 other users.  Given that those
    were sequential inserts of record size of 512 bytes, it may
    not provide that kind of performance in a real life situation,
    but which benchmark is real?

    Vicki is right that SYBASE has the "hot" features like stored
    procedures and compiled queries.  However, I don't think that's
    just marketing "hype".  Those features happen to be what our
    customers want for better performance.  I don't see anything
    wrong with that.

    Of course, SYBASE has it shares of deficiencies, but you have
    to understand the fact that it is a new product.  My feeling is
    if they are going to be around next year and can deliver all
    the features they promised in the next release, they will be
    a major player in the relational DBMS market.  I am really
    impressed with their organizational and support structures.
    And Bob Esptein is extremely good!

    So, don't be too relax...

    - Tom

We sure aren't relaxed.  It was just nice to see that SYBASE has some warts.
It is a highly specialized, rather than general purpose, product.  For
some customers, the specialization may be desirable.

As for Rdb/VMS not selling well in NY, I blame that on NY.  No VIA
product sells well in NY.  We've done some comparisons of the Rdb
customer list and discovered that Rdb sales in the NY districts are
pitiful compared to other (smaller!) districts.   The same appears to be
true of ACMS.  Rdb/VMS is now the #1 selling relational database product
on VAX (according to Computer Intelligence Corp).  We are working hard
to keep it #1, and expand our marketshare.  Some day the financial
industries may even catch on.

    
    Aye, a lively discussion...
    
    re .1  
    	
    	There is three research notes from Gartner Group's Software
    	Management Strategies (SMS) service in the library (for location
    	see note of PACE, this conference).  
    
    	C-SYB-370  Sybase Becomes a Relational Player  June 12, 1987
    
    	C-SYB-241  Sybase Addresses a Relational Niche July 28, 1986
    
    	P-129-242  The Sybase Dataserver -- A Hybrid   July 28, 1986
    		   Database Engine
                                                                    
        P.S.  I'll comment further after reading Sybase notes.
    
    re .2
    
    	Hi Tom (ala "one from New York")!
    
    	I'm on the 8th floor at One Penn Plaza.  let's discuss NY's
        database preferences further...
    
    re .3
    
        CIC is a wonderful source for finding out whether anyone has
    	a presence in the DEC marketplace but its accuracy is something
    	of another matter.
                          
    	In June 1986, latest insight into VAX/VMS relational database 
    	martketplace was as follows:
    
    		35%  INGRES (RTI)
                28%  Rdb (DEC)
    		22%  Oracle (Oracle)  
    
    	Other points.  
    
    		Oracle down from 25% in 1985.
    	        DBMS was also present but not included (appeared that
    		over 40% DBMS was no longer in use.)	
                
    	Sybase is clearly positioned to as a "up-and-coming" player.
    	Here are some quotes mentioned in the above reports:		
                
    	"By simultaneously (in May) making its initial product introduction
    	and achieving a blockbuster pact with Microsoft, Sybase has
    	become a highly visible player in the relational DBMS marketplace.
        It is now the second <vendor> (after Tandem with its Non-Stop SQL) 
    	to offer an OLTP-capable distributed relational technology, and is
    	positioned to ride the booming intelligent workstation (IWS)
    	market."
                
    	"...it could enable more cost-effective use of Unix and VAX/VMS
    	environments, as well as the employment of cheap Sun workstations
    	MIPS.  While those accomplishments would be very nice, it is
    	the SQL/OLTP enablement of the IBM/Microsoft OS/2 and the IBM
    	VM/CMS platform that would provide excitement."
    
    	"While the VM/CMS strategy is not yet clear, it is most likely
    	that by year-end 1988, it is possible that Sybase would enable 
    	use of a (VAX) Dataserver as a front-end (i.e., Data Toolset
    	environment) to a VM/CMS processor."
               
        "Sybase's Key Deliverables:  
    		High-volume performance, 
    		DBMS-enforced integrity
    		High availability
    		Distributed Data Management"
    
    	"...strategy for solving resource contention between the 
    	operating systems and the DBMSs is to dedicate the environment
    	to one task, thereby relegating the operating system to network
    	manager status.  Sybase's solution for integrity control
    	("triggers" via "Transact SQL") is slick but can be imitated."
    
    	"...already achieved 35 installations before formal product
    	introduction, ..."
    
    	"We estimate that Sybase will achieve calendar year revenues
    	of $6 million from 70 sites, largely because of added emphasis
    	on end-user sales and sharp market focus -- on customers of
    	Oracle, RTI and Britton-Lee."
    
    	
    	------------------------------------------------------------
    
    	This quoting is to serve only one purpose -- this statement
    of Sybase by the leading (IBM) software market researcher goes out 
    to over 700 interfaces in the F500.  
    
    In contrast, Digital only gets indirect coverage in this area (as
    in C-ORC-323  Oracle Systems: Challenged By IBM and DEC 2/24/87)
    
    Bottom Line:  Digital has to demonstrate its ability to have a 
    clear, focused strategy for distributed databases and OLTP.
    
    Until then, Digital must build on its ability to support large 
    commercial accounts on an enterprize-wide scale.  This is a clear
    advantage over the limited support by companies like Sybase, Oracle,
    etc.
    
    Regards, 
    
    Larry T.
    333-6771
    BMT::TIMMINS
    
    
    
    		
    

After speaking to representitive from Sybase, I got some performance numbers 
from them.  Here's what I got, it's not much and it's not qualified (ie, I 
doubt they had any response time constraints)

This was run against ORACLE on a MicroVAX II with 16 mb. There were two sets 
of measurements run, the first was a transaction and the second was a full 
blown benchmark.

1. The transaction is FETCH PRIMARY KEY WITHIN (1 million record relation).

			Sybase		Oracle
		       --------        --------
	  1 user:       6.0 TPS         3.5 TPS 
        10 users:       7.0 TPS         4.0 TPS

2. The benchmark run is the TP1 benchmark which is similair to Debit/Credit.

			Sybase		Oracle
		       --------        --------
	  1 user:       3.0 TPS         1.+ TPS 
        10 users:       3.0 TPS         0.5 TPS


Some other interesting information about Sybase is that it is server-based, 
so it would be comparable to Rdb/VMS and ACMS packaged together.

In a cluster, Sybase does not use the distributed lock manager, it uses a 
Master-Slave relationship to perform in a VAXcluster.  Therefore it has no 
automatic recovery system if the master node goes down.

The only other info that I have is that some of the nice features that 
Sybase has is:

	- full referential integrity, including cascading deletes
	- distributed support, including 2-phase commit and stored 
		procedures
	- triggers

Also the Sybase rep gave me a list of articles that have recently
mentioned Sybase, they are:

COMPUTERWORLD, 6/8/87 - Users point to Sybase potential
MIS WEEK, 5/11/87 - Sybase Makes OLTP Thrust with DBMS
BUSINESS WEEK, 5/11/87 - The Free For All Has Begun
COMPUTERWORLD, 4/11/87 - Data Machine to Fade Away?

Re: .0

> They currently have 11 slaes offices in the US and they are in the process 
> of establishing 1 in Europe.  

A very talented colleague of mine just became one of their first seven
employees in the U.K. so they're branching out.

They'll start selling in U.K early next year once their
familiarisation/training is done.

I'll keep in touch with him and see if he'll sling any tit-bits of info. this
way.

    I would like someone to scotch a rumor that I have heard from a
    customer.  We are currently competing with Sybase at a software
    house and have mentioned to them that their SCMP agreement may be
    at risk if they go Sybase.  They replied that Sybase is going to
    become a CMP of Digital's and they have already talked to someone
    inside Digital to get this info.  This is a bit alarming.  What
    happened to our promotion of our own products?  Who out there is
    shooting us in the foot?
    
    In passing, benchmark literature by Sybase 'leaked' to our client
    show them doing roughly 27 TPS on an 8700 in a Debit/Credit style
    benchmark.  From appearances no terminal I/O was done.  Also, Sybase
    needs to pre-allocate and lock all of its buffers in memory when
    running.  This means that the full 8 to 16 MB that are recommended
    are locked in memory.  We have been trying to find out whether the
    standby server (hot backup) also needs to pre-allocate its memory.
    
    A customer benchmark purports to show Sybase as being 50 times faster
    than Rdb.  Customer achieved one transaction per seven seconds with
    Rdb and 6 to 8 transactions per second with Sybase.  We are trying
    to find out the rest of the conditions around this benchmark.
    
    Our customer keeps coming back to performance.  All of our other
    remarks about development tools, 4Gl's etc. seem to be falling on
    deaf ears.  Anyone who has any other good knockoffs please reply
    here!  We are going to lose this one and Sybase will get a foothold
    in Vancouver (Canada).
    
    							Neil Johnson

I know SYBASE is quick, but I don't believe the 1:50. Did you have a look
at their benchmark. Is RDB using the optimal strategy ? RDB can do A LOT in
7 secs. Are you talking CPU-timings or wall clock ?

Could the proverbial 'next major release' help ?
Product manager for RDB is NOVA::HORN

Try to investigate and not just take what the customer says,

Gerold

    Is your customer prepared to pay the price for Sybase? As I understand
    it, Sybase requires a dedicated VAX to be the database engine (Server).
    So Sybase will really cost $40-$150,000 for the software plus the
    hardware cost of the VAX itself.
    
    Question 2 is, do they need 27 TPS, or are they just entranced with
    the numbers? 27 TPS sounds great. But if they only need 10, it's
    a lot of extra expense for nothing.
    
    From what I have heard, the Sybase tools are not very good. What
    you are saying is that the customer doesn't care about expense or
    ease of use---only performance. If that is his mindset, there is
    little that will sway him from Sybase. If this customer has chosen
    to go with a product for non-business reasons, you will have a very
    hard time.
    
    ---- Michael Booth

    Wait a minute! In note 11.4 Sybase quotes a TP1 benchmark of 3 TPS
    on a Microvax. Now they are telling this customer that Sybase will
    do 27 TP1 TPS on an 8700. Some interpolation will give you a growth
    in power that is not just linear, but linear + 50%! That is amazing
    performance. One would guess they are now quoting numbers that involve
    heavy amounts of read-only transactions.
    
    If the first set of numbers is correct, Sybase will do around 16-18
    TPS (TP1) on an 8700. That hardly puts it in the ultr-high performance
    class.
    
    ---- Michael Booth

	Does somebody know whether there exist an implementation of
    both the data server and data toolset of Sybase on ULTRIX ?
    
    We are just in competition against SUN for a Unix customer.

Something has been nagging in the back of my mind for sometime now.

One point where we criticize Sybase on VMS is that it runs in one single
database server process, whereas we run Rdb/VMS in each user process (so
avoiding the need for a centralized server).

BUT, whenever we want to be serious about high performance OLTP applications,
we talk ACMS, which precisely implements a server-based solution. And it is not
even multi-threaded (as the Sybase server is) ;-) - of course, we can have
multiple ACMS servers - (does Sybase ?)

Any comments ?

/albert

The problem with SYBASE is that they run in a SINGLE process.  They do
this so they can perform all of the inter-transaction, inter-user
coordination themselves, rather than using operating system facilities.
It is also highly portable, since it is fairly independent of o/s
facilities or even memory management models (which would impact a
multi-server approach).  But basically, for any one database you have
only one server, and this just doesn't work well for SMP.

The approach we recommend for ACMS/Rdb does reduce the number of
processes, but we suggest tuning so that you never get above a
fractional queue of tasks waiting for a server to become available.
Thus, you just about always end up with AT LEAST as many servers as
there are processors in your SMP system (and usually more).

Hal

    I have been asked to configure a LAVC for a Japanese bank to run
    Sybase. They currently have a MicroVAX 3400 with 7 VAXstation 3100s
    as the front-end. They are currently intending to add another couple
    of VAXstations and a second 3400.
    
    I understand that Sybase cannot gain any performance from clusters
    and that you cannot have a server on more than one cluster node
    accessing the same database. I am trying to get some information
    from Sybase, but this is not very easy, so does anybody know the
    current position and whether they have any plans to support clusters
    in the future ?

    Be very careful. Sybase on VMS itself doesn't perform well. The Sybase
    architecture is geared to stand-alone uniprocessors. They are in the
    process of writing some kind of "fix" that will allow them to use SMP.
    It has been reported that this will require 200,000 lines of new code.
    That doesn't sound very pretty.
    
    VAXcluster architecture is diametrically opposed to Sybase architecture
    (single server). A Sybase move to effectively support clusters would
    amaze me given the architectural problems of single server in a
    VAXcluster.
    
    ---- Michael Booth

    Many thanks for your prompt reply. It wasn't my idea to use Sybase!

    Does APT Workbench support DECwindows on VMS ?
    
    A potential customer has decided on Sybase and X-windows, but he is
    worried that APT Workbench (the "4GL" in the Sybase tool-set) maybee
    cannot run on DECwindows, and that the applications generated by APT
    Workbench will be only charater-cell-applications (VT-emulation) and
    not DECwindows-applications (with menues etc...).
    
    Please mail me ASAP if you have any info regarding this topic !
    
    Regards,
    Paul.

    Last week I was told by a consultant for Sybase in the UK (Paul Broomfield,
    ex-DEC) that Sybase support for VMS DECwindows would be available
    "sometime within the next six months".

news to me; i've only head the terminal version available (aka to ship) in feb;
currently in acid-test (field test)

/los

    Please don't shoot the messenger! I am only repeating what I was
    told.

    Front page Dec/computing 25/4/90
    
    Sybase to produce relational database aimed at VAX9000
    
    Sybase is to launch the first relational database for symmetric
    multi-processing machines, including the VAX9000, later this year.
    SQL Server with the new Virtual Server Architecture will be available
    on DEC, Stratus and Pyramid machines in the autumn.
    Like the uniprocessor architecture, VSA provides a database operating
    system with multitasking kernel that accepts user requests and manages
    database tasks. Marketing director John Stevens said this is unlike
    most RDBMSs because it uses the main operating system only for low
    level tasks. VSA creates a database process on each CPU, although these
    appear as a single process, or virtual server, to clients on the
    system. VSA distributes user requests between CPUs and manages load
    balancing and synchronisation independantly of the operating system.
    On a Stratus XA2000 Model 160, SQL Server with VSA achieved a
    throughput rate of 43 tps, according to Stevens, running the TP1
    benchmark. This compares with 8.1tps on a uniprocessor server, and even
    better results would be expected on a VAX which does not have the
    additional overheads incurred by fault tolerance.
    Stevens claims VSA offers almost linear scalability - when a new CPU is
    added, database performance increase around 95 per cent. The
    near-independence from the operating system also means SQL Server
    requires only 50Kbytes of memory per user.

    From the front page of Digital Review of 6/11/90:
    
    DEC Enlists Sybase's secure RDBSM
    
    "DEC last week announced it will resell to the U.S. Military Sybase's
    Secure SQL Server, a multilevel secure relational database management
    system that meets B-1 Security specifications"
    
    "The three-year Digital Distributed Software (DDS) agreement is a major
    win for Sybase because of the boost it will get from DEC's endorsement
    analysts said"
    
    Further statements:  about how this is further evidence Digital cannot
    provide a single overriding RDBMS strategy that satisfies all of its
    customer demands, risks around undermining our Rdb sales strategy,
    notes ORACLE, Ingres & Sybase agreements as a bewildering strategy in
    some cases, etc.
    
    Mark
    

    From a full page ad in Comuterworld, September 10, 1990 (copied without
    permission):
    
    [large bold letters]
    The Military Airlieft Command Has Good Reasons For Choosing Our On-Line
    RDBMS.
    
    [a large picture of Saddam is included with the ad]
    
    [text]
    One reason is as close as today's headlines.
    
    The crisis in the Middle East unleashed the largest airlift in the
    history of the Military Airlift Command -- more than 1,100 aircraft,
    flying 100,000 troops and a billion pounds of cargo to Saudi Arabia,
    all on a moment's notice.
    
    MAC chose SYBASE for exactly that kind of operation.
    
    Because only SYBASE, with its Client/Server Architecture, can provide
    the distributed computing capabilities needed to manage a massive
    operation absolutely dependent on real-time access to on-line
    information.
    
    SYBASE lets MAC use familiar client hardware, like PCs and Macintoshes,
    to access critical data from any of its 211 locations worldwide.
    
    SYBASE supports absolute data integrity and security in MAC's worldwide
    distributed environment.  Business rules are written once -- into the
    SYBASE programmable server -- and automatically implemented across all
    applications and enforced throughtout the network.  And only SYBASE
    Secure SQL Server offers multi-level data security designed to meet B1
    level standards.
    
    SYBASE delivers the high application availability MAC requires. 
    Back-ups, recoveries, diagnostics, transaction logic and integrity
    changes all take place while applications run.
    
    In short, only SYBASE offers everything the Military Airlift Command
    needs to manage a massive, worldwide, on-line enterprise.  One which,
    if it were an industrial company, would rank number 10 on the Fortune
    100.
    
    It's easy to find out more about how Sybase can help you handle your
    information management needs -- crises and all.  Just attend a free
    Sybase seminar.
    
    Call 1-800-8-SYBASE for the seminar nearest you.
                                                                    

    RE: .22
    
    Now for the facts...
    
    The Military Airlift Command (MAC) has several Command and Control
    systems which are used in carrying out the mission of MAC.  One of the
    primary systems in use by MAC is the Global Decision Support System
    (GDSS).  (For additional information on GDSS, please see this week's
    issue of Digital Today, or Computerworld, Sep 3, p 6.)
    
    GDSS is based upon Rdb/VMS.  No MAC system currently deployed uses
    Sybase.  Additionally, all of the client hardware mentioned in the
    previous note is not deployed.  GDSS is based upon VAX computers, using
    VMS, Rdb/VMS, DECnet and other Digital products.  The user devices are
    VT terminals and VAXstation workstations.
    
    During the current Desert Shield operations, GDSS has performed in an
    outstanding manner.  While other Command and Control systems were
    choking under the heavy workloads, GDSS continued to perform.  Within
    days of Desert Shield beginning, GDSS had to perform additional work to
    replace some systems which were not functioning.  Systems which should
    have fed information to GDSS, could not do this.  GDSS had to pick up
    the slack, and actually feed results back to systems so other DoD users
    would stay informed.  Additionally, under heavy load, MAC added many
    other users and several additional sites.  I should point out that it
    is rare for any application to actually grow in deployment and function
    under heavy stress conditions.  
    
    Back to Sybase...
    Sybase is currently installed in MAC's Multilevel Secure (MLS) testbed
    which happends to be at Digital's St Louis facility.  Digital is the
    Systems Integrator of the MLS/GDSS Program, a program designed to add
    MLS capabilities to the existing GDSS.  Sybase is not supporting Desert
    Shield, nor is any Sybase product likely to support Desert Shield
    (unless this operation lasts more than a few years).
    
    Sybase has not been selected for MAC's future systems.  Sybase has
    merely been selected for inclusion in the testbed.  This makes Sybase a
    candidate for use in the future.
    
    Based upon what we've seen of the Sybase product, I can't recommend
    it's use.  The product is bug ridden, slow and unreliable.  Any
    database which returns different results for the same query is not one
    I'd like to use for a mission critical application.  Additionally,
    Sybase's tech support people have generally not even heard of the
    Secure SQL server, and when they have, they don't really understand it.  
    
    Regardless, I just wanted to let you all know that the ad in .22 is not
    true.  We have alerted our customer, GSG legal, Corp PR, and the
    marketing folks which oversee our agreements with Sybase for the Secure
    SQL Server.
    
    Samuel Doncaster
    Project Manager
    MLS Research & Development
    MLS/GDSS Program
                    

    This is really disgusting; these guys (SYBASE) are starting to sound
    more and more like the Big "O".  BTW, everybody does know that they've
    recently laid off 50 people . . . I know, it doesn't sound like much,
    but they only had 933 to start with so it's over 5% of their workforce!
    
    Let's make sure that all our friends who are involved with government
    accounts know THE TRUTH about who's moving the troops.
    
    Maryann