DOCSLIB.ORG

Database Software Market: Billy Fitzsimmons +1 312 364 5112

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Database Software Market: Billy Fitzsimmons +1 312 364 5112 Equity Research Technology, Media, & Communications | Enterprise and Cloud Infrastructure March 22, 2019 Industry Report Jason Ader +1 617 235 7519 [email protected] Database Software Market: Billy Fitzsimmons +1 312 364 5112 The Long-Awaited Shake-up [email protected] Naji +1 212 245 6508 [email protected] Please refer to important disclosures on pages 70 and 71. Analyst certification is on page 70. William Blair or an affiliate does and seeks to do business with companies covered in its research reports. As a result, investors should be aware that the firm may have a conflict of interest that could affect the objectivity of this report. This report is not intended to provide personal investment advice. The opinions and recommendations here- in do not take into account individual client circumstances, objectives, or needs and are not intended as recommen- dations of particular securities, financial instruments, or strategies to particular clients. The recipient of this report must make its own independent decisions regarding any securities or financial instruments mentioned herein. William Blair Contents Key Findings ......................................................................................................................3 Introduction .......................................................................................................................5 Database Market History ...................................................................................................7 Market Definitions .............................................................................................................9 The DBaaS Wave ..............................................................................................................18 Sizing the Operational Database Market ........................................................................19 The Open Source Insurgency ..........................................................................................29 The Pull of the Cloud .......................................................................................................35 Rise of Containers and Microservices .............................................................................35 Competitive Landscape ...................................................................................................37 Private Company Profiles ................................................................................................46 Appendix: Glossary of Terms ..........................................................................................62 2 Jason Ader +1 617 235 7519 William Blair Key Findings Exploding volume of data + changing nature of applications + cloud adoption + open source = database market disruption. Ninety percent of the world’s data was created in the past two years alone, according to Forbes. At the same time, lines of business are increasingly demanding a broader set of applications that can harness data to drive digital transformation. Many of these applications are cloud-native, and a growing percentage are being built on a microservices architecture. All of these applications must be supported by an underlying database, which increasingly is based on innovation in the roughly $30 billion operational database management system (ODBMS) market. open-source software. The confluence of these trends is driving disruption, fragmentation, and Proliferation of database types has driven market confusion. To keep pace with the surging volume of data and changing nature of applications, the database itself has undergone a transfor- mation. This has fueled the emergence of a plethora of database types and vendors over the past (on-premises, cloud, hybrid) and different ways data can be stored (multiple database models) have ledseveral to hype years and geared market toward confusion, specific though use-cases. the dust However, appears theto be different settling places as customers data can learn be storedwhich products/vendors work best for different use-cases. It’s all about the use-case. Our research indicates that the historical distinction between relational databases (where data is organized by rows and columns) and nonrelational databases (where databases (e.g., MongoDB) can increasingly address transactional use-cases like order processing, whichdata is rely organized on data in of meansrecord other(the historical than rows purview and columns) of relational is blurring. DBs). Conversely, Specifically, some nonrelational relational DBs (e.g., Google Cloud Spanner) can address use-cases like gaming, which require distributed scal- ing (the historical purview of nonrelational DBs). Over time, this suggests that the religious debate on relational versus nonrelational will give way to a more pragmatic database selection process centered on use-case suitability. Secular shift toward nonrelational DBs, but death of relational DBs is greatly exaggerated. We expect continued rapid adoption of nonrelational DBs alongside the boom in unstructured and scalability inherent in a nonrelational DB. Put simply, nonrelational DBs are better aligned withdata moderncreation applications, and next-generation, agile software cloud-native development, applications and the thatburgeoning demand DevOps the speed, ecosystem. flexibility, Yet we do not believe this will eliminate the need for relational databases, which will continue to be heavily utilized for mission-critical, transactional applications (as well as for complex query data warehousing) and for which there remains substantial organizational inertia. To put this in con- text, IDC forecasts that relational DBs will still account for more than 80% of the total operational database market by 2022, though we suspect that this prediction is too conservative with respect to nonrelational DB adoption. DBaaS (database-as-a-service) is becoming table stakes. The DBaaS model has taken the market by storm in recent years as it frees up developers from self-hosting and managing what is arguably worrying about managing and tuning the database (and its underlying infrastructure)—which is outsourcedthe most complex to the DBaaSand difficult-to-manage provider—developers layer areof the able application to focus on stack building (the applicationsdatabase). Instead with the of speed and agility necessary in today’s information-driven economy. Sold as a fully managed, sub- scription service by a CSP (cloud service provider) or independent database vendor (running on a public or private cloud), a DBaaS virtualizes the database from the application, allowing the database to be run and managed independent of the application (this is especially useful for microservices- based applications). For DBaaS vendors, a primary appeal is the ability to monetize free usage of open-source database software. Jason Ader +1 617 235 7519 3 William Blair Multimodel databases are taking hold. To address market fragmentation and the resulting customer confusion, vendors have introduced multimodel databases, which incorporate multiple database structures in the same package, enabling data to be represented for numerous use-cases - plication being addressed). As noted above, these general-purpose databases can even offer both simultaneously (with the choice of mode based on what is most appropriate for the specific ap throat-to-choke approach will appeal to certain users, we still see room for specialized databases suchrelational as graph and and nonrelational time-series capabilitiesto be successful in the given same their platform. uniqueness While and this unmatched one-size-fits-all, performance one- Open-sourcefor specific use-cases. databases becoming more closed. The developer-centric nature of the operational database market explains in large part the popularity and proliferation of open-source offerings (about 170 open-source databases out there today, according to website DB-Engines), and com- mercial open-source vendors rely on the “freemium” model to spur adoption of their paid solutions. projects like MongoDB, Redis, and PostgreSQL has spurred a backlash among open-source vendors. TheseHowever, vendors the ability believe of thatcloud CSPs providers are unfairly to develop monetizing commercial open-source DBaaS softwareofferings while from contributingopen-source little to the community. As a result, several open-source vendors, including MongoDB and Redis Labs, sell services based on their open-source technologies – although there is still no consensus in the openhave attemptedsource community to institute for morehow to restrictive deal with licensing so-called models CSP “strip to make mining.” it more difficult for CSPs to Streaming data will increasingly be used for operational purposes. (e.g., machine-generated data) was used only for analytical purposes, but with advances in memory and chip processing it is now possible to process streaming data in real-time.Historically, With streamingthe emergence data of internet of things (IoT), more data will be created in real-time, and enterprises will want and need to harness this real-time data to deliver personalized experiences to customers and extract - optimizeinstantaneous the routes insights taken for bystrategic its delivery decision-making vehicles. and business efficiency. For example, a pack age delivery company could blend real-time traffic data together with customer pickup requests to Growing convergence of transactional and analytical databases. - Historically, the
Load more

Recommended publications
  • (AWS) Security Workshop - Pre-Read Material
    Amazon Web Services (AWS) Security Workshop - Pre-read material It is highly recommended to go through the pre-read before attending the AWS Security workshop. Shared Responsibility Model Security and Compliance is a shared responsibility between AWS and the customer. This shared model can help relieve the customer’s operational burden as AWS operates, manages and controls the components from the host operating system and virtualization layer down to the physical security of the facilities in which the service operates. The customer assumes responsibility and management of the guest operating system (including updates and security patches), other associated application software as well as the configuration of the AWS provided security group firewall. Customers should carefully consider the services they choose as their responsibilities vary depending on the services used, the integration of those services into their IT environment, and applicable laws and regulations. The nature of this shared responsibility also provides the flexibility and customer control that permits the deployment. As shown in the chart below, this differentiation of responsibility is commonly referred to as Security “of” the Cloud versus Security “in” the Cloud. AWS responsibility “Security of the Cloud” - AWS is responsible for protecting the infrastructure that runs all of the services offered in the AWS Cloud. This infrastructure is composed of the hardware, software, networking, and facilities that run AWS Cloud services. Customer responsibility “Security in the Cloud” – Customer responsibility will be determined by the AWS Cloud services that a customer selects. This determines the amount of configuration work the customer must perform as part of their security responsibilities.
    [Show full text]
  • Graph Database for Collaborative Communities Rania Soussi, Marie-Aude Aufaure, Hajer Baazaoui
    Graph Database for Collaborative Communities Rania Soussi, Marie-Aude Aufaure, Hajer Baazaoui To cite this version: Rania Soussi, Marie-Aude Aufaure, Hajer Baazaoui. Graph Database for Collaborative Communities. Community-Built Databases, Springer, pp.205-234, 2011. hal-00708222 HAL Id: hal-00708222 https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00708222 Submitted on 14 Jun 2012 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. Graph Database For collaborative Communities 1, 2 1 Rania Soussi , Marie-Aude Aufaure , Hajer Baazaoui2 1Ecole Centrale Paris, Applied Mathematics & Systems Laboratory (MAS), SAP Business Objects Academic Chair in Business Intelligence 2Riadi-GDL Laboratory, ENSI – Manouba University, Tunis Abstract Data manipulated in an enterprise context are structured data as well as un- structured data such as emails, documents, social networks, etc. Graphs are a natural way of representing and modeling such data in a unified manner (Structured, semi-structured and unstructured ones). The main advantage of such a structure relies in the dynamic aspect and the capability to represent relations, even multiple ones, between objects. Recent database research work shows a growing interest in the definition of graph models and languages to allow a natural way of handling data appearing.
    [Show full text]
  • Beyond Relational Databases
    EXPERT ANALYSIS BY MARCOS ALBE, SUPPORT ENGINEER, PERCONA Beyond Relational Databases: A Focus on Redis, MongoDB, and ClickHouse Many of us use and love relational databases… until we try and use them for purposes which aren’t their strong point. Queues, caches, catalogs, unstructured data, counters, and many other use cases, can be solved with relational databases, but are better served by alternative options. In this expert analysis, we examine the goals, pros and cons, and the good and bad use cases of the most popular alternatives on the market, and look into some modern open source implementations. Beyond Relational Databases Developers frequently choose the backend store for the applications they produce. Amidst dozens of options, buzzwords, industry preferences, and vendor offers, it’s not always easy to make the right choice… Even with a map! !# O# d# "# a# `# @R*7-# @94FA6)6 =F(*I-76#A4+)74/*2(:# ( JA$:+49>)# &-)6+16F-# (M#@E61>-#W6e6# &6EH#;)7-6<+# &6EH# J(7)(:X(78+# !"#$%&'( S-76I6)6#'4+)-:-7# A((E-N# ##@E61>-#;E678# ;)762(# .01.%2%+'.('.$%,3( @E61>-#;(F7# D((9F-#=F(*I## =(:c*-:)U@E61>-#W6e6# @F2+16F-# G*/(F-# @Q;# $%&## @R*7-## A6)6S(77-:)U@E61>-#@E-N# K4E-F4:-A%# A6)6E7(1# %49$:+49>)+# @E61>-#'*1-:-# @E61>-#;6<R6# L&H# A6)6#'68-# $%&#@:6F521+#M(7#@E61>-#;E678# .761F-#;)7-6<#LNEF(7-7# S-76I6)6#=F(*I# A6)6/7418+# @ !"#$%&'( ;H=JO# ;(\X67-#@D# M(7#J6I((E# .761F-#%49#A6)6#=F(*I# @ )*&+',"-.%/( S$%=.#;)7-6<%6+-# =F(*I-76# LF6+21+-671># ;G';)7-6<# LF6+21#[(*:I# @E61>-#;"# @E61>-#;)(7<# H618+E61-# *&'+,"#$%&'$#( .761F-#%49#A6)6#@EEF46:1-#
    [Show full text]
  • The Business Case for In-Memory Databases
    THE BUSINESS CASE FOR IN-MEMORY DATABASES By Elliot King, PhD Research Fellow, Lattanze Center for Information Value Loyola University Maryland Abstract Creating a true real-time enterprise has long been a goal for many organizations. The efficient use of appropriate enterprise information is always a central element of that vision. Enabling organizations to operate in real-time requires the ability to access data without delay and process transactions immediately and efficiently. In-memory databases, (IMDB) which offer much faster I/O than on-disk database technology deliver on the promise of real-time access to data. Case studies demonstrate the value of real-time access to data provided by in-memory database systems. Organizations are increasingly recognizing the value of incorporating real- time data access with appropriate applications. In-memory databases, an established technology, have traditionally been used in telecommunications and financial applications. Now they are being successfully deployed in other applications. The overall increases in data volumes which can slow down on-disk database management systems have driven this shift. Additionally, increased computer processing power and main memory capacities have facilitated more ubiquitous in-memory databases which can either standalone or serve as a cache for on-disk databases—thus creating a hybrid infrastructure. Introduction: The Real-Time Enterprise For the last decade, the real-time enterprise has been a strategic objective for many organizations and has been the stimulus for significant investment in IT. Building a real-time enterprise entails implementing access to the most timely and up-to-date data, reducing or eliminating delays in transaction processing and accelerating decision- making at all levels of an organization.
    [Show full text]
  • Data Platforms Map from 451 Research
    1 2 3 4 5 6 Azure AgilData Cloudera Distribu2on HDInsight Metascale of Apache Kaa MapR Streams MapR Hortonworks Towards Teradata Listener Doopex Apache Spark Strao enterprise search Apache Solr Google Cloud Confluent/Apache Kaa Al2scale Qubole AWS IBM Azure DataTorrent/Apache Apex PipelineDB Dataproc BigInsights Apache Lucene Apache Samza EMR Data Lake IBM Analy2cs for Apache Spark Oracle Stream Explorer Teradata Cloud Databricks A Towards SRCH2 So\ware AG for Hadoop Oracle Big Data Cloud A E-discovery TIBCO StreamBase Cloudera Elas2csearch SQLStream Data Elas2c Found Apache S4 Apache Storm Rackspace Non-relaonal Oracle Big Data Appliance ObjectRocket for IBM InfoSphere Streams xPlenty Apache Hadoop HP IDOL Elas2csearch Google Azure Stream Analy2cs Data Ar2sans Apache Flink Azure Cloud EsgnDB/ zone Platforms Oracle Dataflow Endeca Server Search AWS Apache Apache IBM Ac2an Treasure Avio Kinesis LeanXcale Trafodion Splice Machine MammothDB Drill Presto Big SQL Vortex Data SciDB HPCC AsterixDB IBM InfoSphere Towards LucidWorks Starcounter SQLite Apache Teradata Map Data Explorer Firebird Apache Apache JethroData Pivotal HD/ Apache Cazena CitusDB SIEM Big Data Tajo Hive Impala Apache HAWQ Kudu Aster Loggly Ac2an Ingres Sumo Cloudera SAP Sybase ASE IBM PureData January 2016 Logic Search for Analy2cs/dashDB Logentries SAP Sybase SQL Anywhere Key: B TIBCO Splunk Maana Rela%onal zone B LogLogic EnterpriseDB SQream General purpose Postgres-XL Microso\ Ry\ X15 So\ware Oracle IBM SAP SQL Server Oracle Teradata Specialist analy2c PostgreSQL Exadata
    [Show full text]
  • ACID Compliant Distributed Key-Value Store
    ACID Compliant Distributed Key-Value Store #1 #2 #3 Lakshmi Narasimhan Seshan ,​ Rajesh Jalisatgi ,​ Vijaeendra Simha G A # ​ ​ ​ ​1l​ [email protected] # ​2r​ [email protected] #3v​ [email protected] Abstract thought that would be easier to implement. All Built a fault-tolerant and strongly-consistent key/value storage components run http and grpc endpoints. Http endpoints service using the existing RAFT implementation. Add ACID are for debugging/configuration. Grpc Endpoints are transaction capability to the service using a 2PC variant. Build used for communication between components. on the raftexample[1] (available as part of etcd) to add atomic Replica Manager (RM): RM is the service discovery transactions. This supports sharding of keys and concurrent transactions on sharded KV Store. By Implementing a part of the system. RM is initiated with each of the transactional distributed KV store, we gain working knowledge Replica Servers available in the system. Users have to of different protocols and complexities to make it work together. instantiate the RM with the number of shards that the user wants the key to be split into. Currently we cannot Keywords— ACID, Key-Value, 2PC, sharding, 2PL Transaction dynamically change while RM is running. New Replica ​ ​ Servers cannot be added or removed from once RM is I. INTRODUCTION ​ up and running. However Replica Servers can go down Distributed KV stores have become a norm with the and come back and RM can detect this. Each Shard advent of microservices architecture and the NoSql Leader updates the information to RM, while the DTM revolution. Initially KV Store discarded ACID properties leader updates its information to the RM.
    [Show full text]
  • JMP Securities Elite 80 Report (Formerly Super 70)
    Cybersecurity, Data Management & ,7 Infrastructure FEBRUARY 201 ELITE 80 THE HOTTEST PRIVATELY HELD &<%(5SECURITY, '$7$0$1$*(0(17 AND ,7,1)5$6758&785( COMPANIES &RS\ULJKWWLWLSRQJSZO6KXWWHUVWRFNFRP Erik Suppiger Patrick Walravens Michael Berg [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] (415) 835-3918 (415) 835-8943 (415)-835-3914 FOR DISCLOSURE AND FOOTNOTE INFORMATION, REFER TO JMP FACTS AND DISCLOSURES SECTION. Cybersecurity, Data Management & IT Infrastructure TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary ............................................................................................................................ 4 Top Trends and Technological Changes ............................................................................................ 5 Funding Trends ................................................................................................................................ 11 Index by Venture Capital Firm .......................................................................................................... 17 Actifio ................................................................................................................................................ 22 Alert Logic ......................................................................................................................................... 23 AlgoSec ............................................................................................................................................ 24 AnchorFree ......................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • AWS Managed Services (AMS)
    AWS Managed Services (AMS) Application Developer's Guide AMS Advanced Operations Plan Version September 16, 2020 AWS Managed Services (AMS) Application Developer's Guide AMS Advanced Operations Plan AWS Managed Services (AMS) Application Developer's Guide: AMS Advanced Operations Plan Copyright © Amazon Web Services, Inc. and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved. Amazon's trademarks and trade dress may not be used in connection with any product or service that is not Amazon's, in any manner that is likely to cause confusion among customers, or in any manner that disparages or discredits Amazon. All other trademarks not owned by Amazon are the property of their respective owners, who may or may not be affiliated with, connected to, or sponsored by Amazon. AWS Managed Services (AMS) Application Developer's Guide AMS Advanced Operations Plan Table of Contents Application Onboarding to AMS Introduction ........................................................................................ 1 What is Application Onboarding? ................................................................................................. 1 What we do, what we do not do .................................................................................................. 1 AMS Amazon Machine Images (AMIs) ............................................................................................ 2 Security enhanced AMIs ...................................................................................................... 4 Key terms .................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Property Graph Vs RDF Triple Store: a Comparison on Glycan Substructure Search
    RESEARCH ARTICLE Property Graph vs RDF Triple Store: A Comparison on Glycan Substructure Search Davide Alocci1,2, Julien Mariethoz1, Oliver Horlacher1,2, Jerven T. Bolleman3, Matthew P. Campbell4, Frederique Lisacek1,2* 1 Proteome Informatics Group, SIB Swiss Institute of Bioinformatics, Geneva, 1211, Switzerland, 2 Computer Science Department, University of Geneva, Geneva, 1227, Switzerland, 3 Swiss-Prot Group, SIB Swiss Institute of Bioinformatics, Geneva, 1211, Switzerland, 4 Department of Chemistry and Biomolecular Sciences, Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia * [email protected] Abstract Resource description framework (RDF) and Property Graph databases are emerging tech- nologies that are used for storing graph-structured data. We compare these technologies OPEN ACCESS through a molecular biology use case: glycan substructure search. Glycans are branched Citation: Alocci D, Mariethoz J, Horlacher O, tree-like molecules composed of building blocks linked together by chemical bonds. The Bolleman JT, Campbell MP, Lisacek F (2015) molecular structure of a glycan can be encoded into a direct acyclic graph where each node Property Graph vs RDF Triple Store: A Comparison on Glycan Substructure Search. PLoS ONE 10(12): represents a building block and each edge serves as a chemical linkage between two build- e0144578. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0144578 ing blocks. In this context, Graph databases are possible software solutions for storing gly- Editor: Manuela Helmer-Citterich, University of can structures and Graph query languages, such as SPARQL and Cypher, can be used to Rome Tor Vergata, ITALY perform a substructure search. Glycan substructure searching is an important feature for Received: July 16, 2015 querying structure and experimental glycan databases and retrieving biologically meaning- ful data.
    [Show full text]
  • LIST of NOSQL DATABASES [Currently 150]
    Your Ultimate Guide to the Non - Relational Universe! [the best selected nosql link Archive in the web] ...never miss a conceptual article again... News Feed covering all changes here! NoSQL DEFINITION: Next Generation Databases mostly addressing some of the points: being non-relational, distributed, open-source and horizontally scalable. The original intention has been modern web-scale databases. The movement began early 2009 and is growing rapidly. Often more characteristics apply such as: schema-free, easy replication support, simple API, eventually consistent / BASE (not ACID), a huge amount of data and more. So the misleading term "nosql" (the community now translates it mostly with "not only sql") should be seen as an alias to something like the definition above. [based on 7 sources, 14 constructive feedback emails (thanks!) and 1 disliking comment . Agree / Disagree? Tell me so! By the way: this is a strong definition and it is out there here since 2009!] LIST OF NOSQL DATABASES [currently 150] Core NoSQL Systems: [Mostly originated out of a Web 2.0 need] Wide Column Store / Column Families Hadoop / HBase API: Java / any writer, Protocol: any write call, Query Method: MapReduce Java / any exec, Replication: HDFS Replication, Written in: Java, Concurrency: ?, Misc: Links: 3 Books [1, 2, 3] Cassandra massively scalable, partitioned row store, masterless architecture, linear scale performance, no single points of failure, read/write support across multiple data centers & cloud availability zones. API / Query Method: CQL and Thrift, replication: peer-to-peer, written in: Java, Concurrency: tunable consistency, Misc: built-in data compression, MapReduce support, primary/secondary indexes, security features.
    [Show full text]
  • Performance at Scale with Amazon Elasticache
    Performance at Scale with Amazon ElastiCache July 2019 Notices Customers are responsible for making their own independent assessment of the information in this document. This document: (a) is for informational purposes only, (b) represents current AWS product offerings and practices, which are subject to change without notice, and (c) does not create any commitments or assurances from AWS and its affiliates, suppliers or licensors. AWS products or services are provided “as is” without warranties, representations, or conditions of any kind, whether express or implied. The responsibilities and liabilities of AWS to its customers are controlled by AWS agreements, and this document is not part of, nor does it modify, any agreement between AWS and its customers. © 2019 Amazon Web Services, Inc. or its affiliates. All rights reserved. Contents Introduction .......................................................................................................................... 1 ElastiCache Overview ......................................................................................................... 2 Alternatives to ElastiCache ................................................................................................. 2 Memcached vs. Redis ......................................................................................................... 3 ElastiCache for Memcached ............................................................................................... 5 Architecture with ElastiCache for Memcached ...............................................................
    [Show full text]
  • High Performance with Distributed Caching
    High Performance with Distributed Caching Key Requirements For Choosing The Right Solution High Performance with Distributed Caching: Key Requirements for Choosing the Right Solution Table of Contents Executive summary 3 Companies are choosing Couchbase for their caching layer, and much more 3 Memory-first 4 Persistence 4 Elastic scalability 4 Replication 5 More than caching 5 About this guide 5 Memcached and Oracle Coherence – two popular caching solutions 6 Oracle Coherence 6 Memcached 6 Why cache? Better performance, lower costs 6 Common caching use cases 7 Key requirements for an effective distributed caching solution 8 Problems with Oracle Coherence: cost, complexity, capabilities 8 Memcached: A simple, powerful open source cache 10 Lack of enterprise support, built-in management, and advanced features 10 Couchbase Server as a high-performance distributed cache 10 General-purpose NoSQL database with Memcached roots 10 Meets key requirements for distributed caching 11 Develop with agility 11 Perform at any scale 11 Manage with ease 12 Benchmarks: Couchbase performance under caching workloads 12 Simple migration from Oracle Coherence or Memcached to Couchbase 13 Drop-in replacement for Memcached: No code changes required 14 Migrating from Oracle Coherence to Couchbase Server 14 Beyond caching: Simplify IT infrastructure, reduce costs with Couchbase 14 About Couchbase 14 Caching has become Executive Summary a de facto technology to boost application For many web, mobile, and Internet of Things (IoT) applications that run in clustered performance as well or cloud environments, distributed caching is a key requirement, for reasons of both as reduce costs. performance and cost. By caching frequently accessed data in memory – rather than making round trips to the backend database – applications can deliver highly responsive experiences that today’s users expect.
    [Show full text]