Tag Archives: Oracle Exadata

Blended Data Warehouse SW/HW Solutions Phased Into the Cloud

Relational Database Solutions “In a Box”

Several of the relational database software vendors, such as IBM, Oracle, and Teradata have developed proprietary data warehouse software to be tightly coupled with server hardware to maximize performance.  These solutions have been developed and refined as “on-prem” solutions for many years.

We’ve seen the rise of “Database (DW)  as a Service” from companies like Amazon, who sell Redshift services.

Amazon Redshift is a fast, fully managed data warehouse that makes it simple and cost-effective to analyze all your data using standard SQL and your existing Business Intelligence (BI) tools.  It allows you to run complex analytic queries against petabytes of structured data, using sophisticated query optimization, columnar storage on high-performance local disks, and massively parallel query execution. Most results come back in seconds.

RDB Complex Software/Hardware Maintenance

In recent times, the traditional relational database software vendors shifted gears to become service providers offering maximum performance from a solution hosted by them, the vendor, in the Cloud.    On the positive side, the added complexity of configuring and tuning a blended software/hardware data warehouse has been shifted from the client’s team resources such as Database Administrators (DBAs), Network Administrators,  Unix/Windows Server Admins,… to the database software service provider.  The complexity of tuning for scalability, and other maintenance challenges shifts to the software vendor’s expertise, if that’s the abstraction you select.  There is some ambiguity in the delineation of responsibilities with the RDBMS vendor’s cloud offerings.

Total Cost of Ownership

Quantifying the total cost of ownership of a solution may be a bit tricky, especially if you’re trying to quantify the RDBMS hybrid software/hardware “on-prem” solution versus the same or similar capabilities brought to the client via “Database (DW) as a Service”.

“On-Prem”, RDB Client Hosted Solution

Several factors need to be considered when selecting ANY software and/or Hardware to be hosted at the client site.

  • Infrastructure “when in Rome”
    • Organizations have a quantifiable cost related to hosting physical or virtual servers in the client’s data center and may be boiled down to a number that may include things like HVAC, or new rack space.
    • Resources used to maintain/monitor DC usage, there may be an abstracted/blended figure.
  • Database Administrators maintain and monitor RDB solutions.
    • Activities may range from RDB patches/upgrades to resizing/scaling the DB storage “containers”.
    • Application Database Admins/Developers may be required to maintain the data warehouse architecture, such as new requirements, e.g. creating aggregate tables for BI analysis.
  • Network Administrators
    • Firewalls, VPN
    • Port Scanning
  • Windows/Unix Server Administrators
    • Antivirus
    • OS Patches

Trying to correlate these costs in some type of “Apples to Apples” comparison to the “Data Warehouse as a Service” may require accountants and technical folks to do extensive financial modeling to make the comparison.   Vendors, such as Oracle, offer fully managed services to the opposite end of the spectrum, the “Bare Metal”, essentially the “Infra as a Service.”  The Oracle Exadata solution can be a significant investment depending on the investment in redundancy and scalability leveraging Oracle Real Application Clusters (RAC). 

Support and Staffing Models for DW Cloud Vendors

In order for the traditional RDB software vendors to accommodate a “Data Warehouse as a Service” model, they may need to significantly increase staff for a variety of technical disciplines, as outlined above with the Client “On-Prem” model.  A significant ramp-up of staff and the organizational challenges of developing and implementing a support model based on a variety of factors may have relational database vendors ask: Should they leverage a top tier consulting agency such as Accenture, or Deloitte to define, implement, and refine a managed service?  It’s certainly a tall order to go from a software vendor to offering large scale services.  With corporate footprints globally and positive track records implementing managed services of all types, it’s an attractive proposition for both the RDB vendor and the consulting agency who wins the bid.  Looking at the DW Service billing models don’t seem sensical on some level.  Any consulting agency who implements a DW managed service would be responsible to ensure ROI both for the RDS vendor and their clients.  It may be opaque to the end client leveraging the Data Warehouse as a Service, but certainly, the quality of service provided should be nothing less than if implemented by the RDB vendor itself.  If the end game for the RDB vendor is for the consulting agency to implement, and mature the service then at some point bring the service in-house, it could help to keep costs down while maturing the managed service.

Oracle Exadata

Here are URLs for reference to understand the capabilities that are realized through Oracle’s managed services.

https://cloud.oracle.com/en_US/database

https://cloud.oracle.com/en_US/database/exadata/features

https://www.oracle.com/engineered-systems/exadata/index.html

Teradata

https://www.teradata.com/products-and-services/intellicloud

https://www.teradata.com/products-and-services/cloud-overview

Teradata
Teradata

DB2

https://www.ibm.com/cloud/db2-warehouse-on-cloud

IBM Mainframe
IBM Mainframe

Note: The opinions shared here are my own.

FinTech: End to End Framework for Client, Intermediary, and Institutional Services

Is it all about being the most convenient,  payment processing partner, with an affinity to the payment processing brand?  It’s a good place to start; the Amazon Payments partner program.

FinTech noun : an economic industry composed of companies that use technology to make financial systems more efficient

Throughout my career, I’ve worked with several financial services  teams to engineer, test, and deploy solutions.  Here is a brief list of the FinTech solutions I helped construct, test,  and deploy:

  1. 3K Global Investment Bankers – proprietary CRM platform, including Business Analytics, Business Objects Universe.
  2. Equity Research platform, crafted based on business expertise.
    • Custom UI for research analysts, enabled the analysts to create their research, and push into the workflow.
    • Based on a set of rules,  ‘locked down’ part of the report would  “Build Discloses” , e.g. analyst holds 10% of co.
    • Custom Documentum workflow would route research to the distribution channels; or direct research to legal review.
  3. (Multiple Financial Org.) Data Warehouse middleware solutions to assist organizations in managing,  and monitoring usage of their DW.
  4. Global Derivatives firm, migration of mainframe system to C# client / Server platform
  5. Investment Bankers and Equity Capital Markets (ECMG)  build trading platform so teams may collaborate on Deals/Trades.
  6. Global Asset Management Firm: On boarding and Fund management solutions, custom UI and workflows in SharePoint

*****

A “Transaction Management Solution” targets a mixture of FinTech services, primarily “Payments” Processing.

Target State Capabilities of a Transaction Management Solution:

  1. Fraud Detection:  The ability to identify and prevent fraud exists within many levels of the transaction from facilitators of EFT to credit monitoring and scoring agencies.  Every touch point of a transaction has its own perspective of possible fraud, and must be evaluated to the extent it can be.
    • Business experts (SMEs)  and technologists continue to expand the practical applications of Artificial Intelligence (AI) every day.  Although extensive AI fraud detection applications  exists today incorporating human populated Rules Engines,  and AI Machine learning (independent rule creation).
  2. Consumer “Financial Insurance” Products
    • Observing a business, end to end transaction may provide visibility into areas of transaction risk.   Process  and/or technology may be adopted / augmented to minimize the risk.
      • E.g. eBay auction process has a risk regarding the changing hands of currency and merchandise.  A “delayed payment”, holding funds until the merchandise has been exchanged minimized the risk, implemented using PayPal.
    • In product lifecycle of Discovery, Development, and Delivery phases, converting concept to product.
  3. Transaction Data Usage for Analytics
    • Client initiating transaction,  intermediary parties, and destination of funds may all tell ‘a story’ about the transaction.
    • Every party within a transaction, beginning to end, may benefit from the use of the transaction data using analytics.
      • e.g. Quicken – personal finance management tool; collects, parses, and augments transaction data to provide client  analytics in the form of charts / graphs, and reports.
    • Clear, consistent, and comprehensive data set available at every point in the transaction lifecycle regardless of platform .
      • e.g. funds transferred between financial institutions may  have a descriptions that are not user friendly, or may not be actionable, e.g. cryptic name, and no contact details.
      • Normalizing data may occur at an abstracted layer
    • Abstracted, and aggregated data used for analytics
      • e.g. average car price given specs XYZ;
      • e.g. 2. avg. credit score in a particular zip code.
    • Continued growth opportunities, and challenges
      • e.g. data privacy v. allowable aggregated data
  4. Affinity Brand Opportunities Transaction Management Solution
    • eWallet affinity brand promotions,
      • e.g. based on transaction items’ rules; no shipping
      • e.g.2. “Cash Back” Rewards, and/or Market Points
      • e.g.3. Optional, “Fundraiser” options at time of purchase.
  5. Credit Umbrella: Monitoring Use Case
    • Transparency into newly, activated accounts enables the Transaction Management Solution (TMS) to trigger a rule to email the card holder, if eligible, to add card to eWallet

Is Intuit an acquisition target because of Quicken’s capabilities to provide users consistent reporting of transactions across all sources?  I just found this note in Wiki while writing this post:

Quicken is a personal finance management tool developed by Intuit, Inc. On March 3, 2016, Intuit announced plans to sell Quicken to H.I.G. Capital. Terms of the sale were not disclosed.[1]

For quite some time companies have attempted to tread in this space with mixed results, either through acquisition or build out of their existing platforms.  There seems to be significant opportunities within the services, software and infrastructure areas.  It will be interesting to see how it all plays out.

Inhibitors to enclosing a transaction within an end to end Transaction Management Solutions (TMS):

  • Higher level of risk (e.g. business, regulatory) expanding out service offerings
  • Stretching too thin, beyond core vision, and lose sight of vision.
  • Transforming tech  company to hybrid financial services
  • Automation, streamlining of processes, may derive efficiencies may lead to reduction in staff / workforce
  • Multiple platforms performing functions provides redundant capabilities, reduced risk, and more consumer choices

 Those inhibitors haven’t stopped these firms:

Payments Ecosystem
Payments Ecosystem