Informix IDS vs Oracle:
A Competitive Comparison
Goal of the Presentation
• Present Architectural Differences between Informix and
Oracle
• Show Informix’s superiority in:
– OLTP
– Data Warehousing / Decision Support
– Content Management and Web Applications
• Show clear business benefits of technology differences
– Performance & scalability
– Extensibility
– Lower cost of ownership
Topics
•
•
•
•
Architecture
OLTP
Data Warehousing
Complex Data / Content
Management
• Summary
At the Core: Informix Dynamic
Scalable Architecture
• Consistent code line across
OWS, ODS, XPS, and IUS
• Advanced functionality
integrated at the core
• Connectivity across the
enterprise
• Integrated Sytems
Management and Replication
Workgroups/
Desktops
SMP
MPP
Cluster
Massively
Parallel
Cluster
Workgroup Server/
Workstation
DynamicSMP
Server
Universal
Workgroups
Server
Extended
Parallel
Server
Informix Server Architecture
•
•
•
...
•
Virtual
Processors
CPU
CPU
...
CPU
...
CPU
DB Buffer Cache Shared Data
Shared Memory
•
•
•
•
•
Full parallel processing
Efficient internal multithreading
Open API for user defined
functions and datatypes
Configurable pool of virtual
processors
No context switching overhead
Dynamic system administration
Dynamic load balancing
DB level prioritization,
scheduling & locking
Database migration
Industry View of Informix
Architecture
“ The general industry consensus among users and
developers is that Informix has the best architecture.”
Patricia Seybold Group, 12/96
• Informix RDBMS was completely rearchitected
in 1991 for parallel processing and
extensibility
• Informix DSA sets the industry standard for
simplicity, elegance and flexibility
Advantages of DSA’s Parallelism
Oracle DBMS
Application
Application
Query
SQL
Database
Server
Informix OnLine DSA
Database
Server
Query
SQL
Task
Task
IDLE
IDLE
CPU
CPU
Subtask
Subtask Subtask
CPU
CPU
30% CPU usage
CPU
CPU
Near 100% CPU usage!
Industry View of Oracle Architecture
“Oracle has never really provided the most
elegant database technology …”
Hambrecht & Quist 2/97
“Oracle will need to perform a significant
redesign of its DBMS engine...”
Gartner Group, 3/96
• Oracle’s database architecture was designed and
written in the early 1980s
• It is widely believed that Oracle needs to rewrite
its DBMS engine
Oracle’s Architectural Approach
Oracle
Paralle
Server
Oracle
Personal
Lite
Video
Server
Network
Computing
Architectur
e
Oracle 8
Oracle 6
Rdb
IRI
Oracle 7
Replication
Engine
• Informix has one architecture: DSA
• In constrast, Oracle has:
– Multiple incompatible servers
– User written integration code
– Incomplete parallel processing
– High OS overhead
– No API for Database Exensibility
– Unclear object strategy and
distributed computing vision
Architectural Comparison:
Performance/Scalability
• Informix
– Consistent high performance across all
platforms and applications
– Best return on hardware and application
investment
• Oracle
– Performance dependent on servers and
configuration
– ROI dependent on OS, platform and
application
Architectural Comparison:
Extensibility
• Informix
– Adaptable API for business specific data and
processing
– Multiple integrated datatypes from leading vendors
– Easily adjusts to new business requirements
• Oracle
– No user-defined datatypes or functions
– Only useful for Numeric, Alpha, Date Order
– New business requirements may require extensive
coding or rewrite
Architectural Comparison: Cost
of Ownership
• Informix
– Single, integrated server from desktop to data warehouse
– Lower cost of maintenance and training
– Architectural simplicity means faster deployment; better ROI
• Oracle
– Multiple non-integrated servers
• Personal Oracle, Oracle 7.x/8.x, Oracle Express, etc...
– Requires more maintenance; higher level of training
– Complexity slows deployment, lessens ROI
Customer Testimonials: Cost of
Ownership
• Wells Fargo converted from Oracle databases to
Informix.
– Working with both vendors showed “…it takes about
60% longer to deploy a project on Oracle than on
Informix.”
• Total Cost of Ownership wins over Oracle
– Bank of America
– GTE
Topics
Architecture
– The Dynamic Scalable Architecture provides
better performance and lower cost of
ownership than Oracle’s many faceted
solution.
• OLTP
• Data Warehousing
• Complex Data / Content Management
OLTP Success Factors
• Performance
– Transaction rates, scalability, multi-user access to data
• Administration and Maintenance
– Low labor costs, compatibility with enterprise
• Replication
– Availability of data, ease of recovery
• Extensibility
– Planning for the future of OLTP
• Cost of Ownership
– How all factors impact the bottom line
OLTP Application Comparison
Informix is significantly faster than Oracle in realworld OLTP applications.
• BAAN Triton 3.1 Client/Server Benchmark
– Informix 1,510 users: ~2X better than Oracle on
identical hardware
– Informix developers and support engineers on-site at
BAAN
• SAP R/3 Benchmark
– New world record on Windows NT: 1,116 users
– Only Informix has joint development lab at SAP
headquarters in Germany.
Industry View of Oracle OLTP
Support
“[Oracle] consumes more OS resources, has a
relatively weak query optimizer and was later to the
game than Informix in parallelization.”
Hambrecht & Quist, 2/97
• Oracle has ‘bolted on’ features rather
than rewriting and integrating
• Many of Oracle’s ‘benchmark special’
OLTP features are largely unusable
Components of OLTP
Performance
• Cost-based optimizer
– efficient queries, best utilization of hardware
• Parallel Insert, Update, Delete (DML)
– high transaction rates, good multi-user access
• Integrated log-based replication
– reliability, recovery, ease of administration
Informix vs. Oracle: Optimizer
•
•
Informix
– Cost based, automatically chooses optimum query strategy
Oracle inferior in these areas:
– Limited support for parallel processing
– Incompatible with standard SQL
• Requires user to define non-standard ‘hints’ based on table
characteristics
– Inefficient
• Optimizer can not be used by standard tools and applications due
to need for ‘hints’
• Most users turn it off
Informix vs. Oracle: Parallel DML
•
•
Informix -- best in industry
– Optimal use of hardware for scalability and performance
Oracle inferior in these areas:
– Data Integrity
• No serializability => no recoverability
• No multi-statement transactions
• No referential integrity
– Advanced Database functionality
• No support for triggers, replication, variable arrays, nested tables,
large objects
– Multi-user concurrency
• Row level locking must be turned off
• Parallel insert locks entire table
Informix vs. Oracle: Replication
• Informix
– Log based. Fast and reliable
– Open. Replicates to other vendors’ databases
– Simple to implement and maintain
• Oracle
– Trigger based. Management nightmare.
– Closed.
• Can only replicate Oracle data.
– High Maintenance overhead.
• requires a separate server
• incompatible with objects, partitions, parallel DML
• triggers
Replication in Practice
Five steps involved in Informix
log-based replication:
Step 1: Transaction updates tables
Step 2: DSA will log these updates using regular (parallel)
logging mechanism
Step 3: Replication threads read from in-memory log buffers
Step 4: Apply threads will fan-out the messages to remote
servers in parallel using optimized protocol
Step 5: Remote servers (targets) will apply transactions in
parallel
Informix Advantages:

3x the I/O, half the # of steps, 5-10x
faster!

This means:

Higher Availability of Data

Less chance for data loss

Easier recovery
Ten steps involved in Oracle
trigger-based replication:
Step 1: Transaction updates tables
Step 2: Oracle will log these updates using regular
logging mechanism
Step 3: Replication triggers are fired (one per table
involved) = additional CPU processing
Step 4: Replication triggers call procedures to update
change queue (additional inserts occur to change
queue tables) = additional I/O processing
Step 5: Oracle will log these inserts using regular
logging mechanism = additional I/O processing
Step 6: Changes get sent via SQL*Net protocol to
target DBMS = significant overhead
Step 7: Target DBMS updates tables
Step 8: Oracle will log these changes using regular
logging
mechanism = additional I/O processing
Step 9: Deletes from change queue tables additional
I/I
Step 10: Oracle will log these deletes using regular
logging mechanism = additional I/O processing
Informix vs. Oracle: Administration
•
•
Informix -- complete and flexible
– Informix Enterprise Command Center
• Automated, Scalable, Open (Java, IIOP, SNMP)
– Enterprise Framework Integration
• HP OpenView, CA UniCenter, DEC PolyCenter, IBM NetView/6000,
Sun Solstice
– Integration with Tools Partners
• BMC, Platinum, Tivoli, Compuware
Oracle -- provides an “Oracle only” solution
– Enterpise Manager
• Closed, Proprietary Architecture
The Next OLTP Advantage:
Extensibility
•
•
Infrastructure Integration
– Move complex business from applications to central control of the
database server
– Add management of today’s “unmanaged data”
• documents, e-mail, images
Meet highly specialized needs
– user defined functions on server
– pre-witten data types (DataBlades) on server
• time series, text management, spatial queries
– high performance indexes for complex relationships, hiearchies,
business rules
Informix vs. Oracle: Extensibility
• Informix
– A single, Universal Server -- available today.
– Full database support for user defined datatypes, abstract
datatypes, user defined functions
– Faster response to changing business requirements; reusable code; flexible systems
• Oracle
– Not currently available in server
– Conflicting extensibility messages
– Promised in Oracle8 since 1993
– Now promised in Oracle middleware (NCA) in 1998
Cost of Ownership: Informix
Advantages
Informix
Result
Better performance &
scalability
 Lower hardware costs
 Fewer upgrades
Fully implemented
features
 Less user code
 Faster deployment
 Easier maintenance
Extensibility
 Keep pace with changing
requirements
 Extends lifespan of
applications
Topics
Architecture
OLTP
– Informix has decisive advantages for OLTP in
the critical areas of Performance,
Administration, Replication, and Extensibility.
• Data Warehousing
• Complex Data / Content Management
Data Warehousing Success
Factors
•
•
•
Hardware Investment
– Hardware cost for 500 GB Data Warehouse:
• $3.5 million on SMP systems
• $7 million on MPP systems
Performance / Processing Time
– Judged in hours and days, not seconds
Ease of Use and Total Cost of Ownership
– Obtain the right answer, easily customize
– Avoid specialized training and tasks
– Minimize hardware investment
Industry View of Oracle DW
Performance
“[Oracle] is notoriously poor at scaling above 2 to 4
nodes.....”
Meta Group
• Oracle parallel processing was introduced as
a late response to Informix
• Its capabilities are limited and incompatible
with other performance oriented features
Result: Informix Wins in Head-toHead Contests
“Informix has beaten both Oracle and IBM for some very
high visibility terabyte accounts - namely MCI, Visa
International, Sears, and Fidelity Investments”
Patricia Seybold Group 2/97
MCI
Sears
HCIA
First Union
Fleet Bank
Fidelity Investment
Telecom
Retail
Healthcare
Financial
Financial
Financial
6 TB
5 TB
3 TB
2-3 TB
1-2 TB
800 GB
TPC-D Performance
(Scale Factor 300 GB)
4000
TPC-D Power (QppD)
3.416
TPC-D Throughput (QthD)
3000
2.009
2000
1.673
1.241
916
1000
0
•
•
•
•
1.360
Informix (HP)
Oracle (Sun)
Oracle (IBM)
1.501
1.028
Teradata (NCR)
Informix vs. Oracle TPC-D: 70% faster on 25% less hardware
– Informix: 48 CPU’s, Oracle: 64 CPU’s
Informix means lowest overall hardware investment
Best price / performance
Less HW = lower admin overhead , lower labor costs
TPC-D Total Running Time
(Scale Factor 300 GB)
6:00
hh:mm
0:00
Load Time
18:0
12:0
6:00
0:00
•
Query Time
3:07
14:53
4:07
5:34
15:09
13:39
14:36
Oracle
(Sun)
Oracle
(IBM)
Teradata
(NCR)
7:47
Informix
(HP)
Data Warehousing encompasses all functions, not just queries
• Informix completed entire benchmark before Oracle completed
loading
• Informix has complete parallel architecture: load, index, query,
backup/restore, management, etc.
Performance: Informix Extended
Parallel Server (XPS)
Node 1
Node 2
Node N
High Speed Interconnect
1
Informix most efficient!
Update requires :
1 message; no I/O
•
•
•
Highly efficient shared nothing architecture
– Each node controls its own log and data
Flexible data partitioning
Function shipping eliminates need for distributed lock
manager
Performance: Oracle Parallel
Server (OPS)
Node 1
Node 2
1
7
same task,
Oracle
requires:
12 Messages
2 I/Os
8
11
DLM
Node N
2
6
3
12
5
4
Oracle Virtual Shared Disk
• Oracle simulates shared disk
– inflexible partitioning scheme
• Requires huge overhead: distributed lock
manager, many extra messages and I/Os
10
9
Performance: Review of Key
Informix Features
• Shared nothing architecture
– Easily locates all data; avoids locking conflicts
• Data partitioning
– Spreads data across multiple disks and nodes for
highest performance
– Six different table/index partitioning options
• Advanced parallel processing
– Best use of hardware Application transparent
parallel everything: query, sort, scan, join,
aggregates, update, delete, insert, ...
– Pipelined parallelism; superior hash-based join
Ease of use: Informix Metacube
vs. Oracle Express
•
•
Informix MetaCube: ROLAP Decision Support
– Integrated tool for browsing and query of the database
– Analyzes standard Informix RDBMS data
• no separate server to administer
• no translation code, no extra overhead
Oracle’s DW Solution requires Oracle Express
– Oracle Express is a separate database server
• does not use RDMBS, but a multi-dimensional DB
– Must load data into Express from main Oracle DB
• user must write “pass through” code
• updating of data requires a re-load
Performance: Oracle Data
Partitioning
• Incomplete
– Supports only simple range partitioning
– No round-robin, hashing, random, direct, expression, schema , ...
– No migration tools from Oracle 7.3
• Incompatible
– Partitioned tables may not contain objects, triggers, constraints, data
clustering, index clustering
• Inefficient
– Range partitioning data skew causes poor performance
– Performance degraded due to inability to use existing features
Informix Customer Story: MCI
MCI Data Warehouse facts at a glance:
• 6 TB of Data
• Friends and Family lead generation program
• 3500 data points on each of 190 million people
• Oracle beaten in head to head competition
– Oracle could not successfully complete the benchmark
• Informix demonstrated DW expertise
– Awarded 1996 Best Practices award by the Data
Warehousing Institute.
– Project established industry’s TPC-D benchmark.
MCI Data Warehouse Benefits
•
Informix DW enables better use of
essential business data.
– Long Distance Providers face
– 50% annual customer turnover
– Better analysis of leads is a
strategic advantage
– Reduction in lead generation cost:
• 1994: $0.90 / lead
• 1996: $0.07 / lead
$/Lead
$0,70
$0,60
$0,50
$0,40
$0,30
$0,20
$0,10
$0,00
1994
 Informix outperformed next competitor by 2X
– initial hardware savings of $2-3 million
– more savings over time: HW will = 4X software cost
1996
The Next Data Warehousing
Advantage: Extensibility
• New types of queries
– add spatial analysis
– add unique business rules, unique data types
• Better information
– Compute the lowest fare route between New York and
Baton Rouge and plot alternative route on a map
• Faster response for complex queries
– Find all high tech stocks that have a risk/reward ratio
lower than current portfolio
Informix vs. Oracle: DW
Extensibility
• Informix
– Numerous complex and new media datatypes
– Database integration => better performance, easier
administration and lower maintenance
– Data Warehouse becomes central information
repository
• Oracle
– Partial database integration of text, image and spatial
data
– Others promised as separate servers or middleware in
Oracle 8
– Much higher overhead, harder to manage
Data Warehouse Cost of
Ownership:
Informix Advantage
Better performance
& scalability
Dramatically faster
load times
E xtensibility built
into server
Result
 F aster answers
 Less hardware required
 E nables applications not
possible with O racle
 M ore frequent updates
 M ore reliable results
 F aster RO I on W arehouse
investment
 F aster deployment
 E asier maintenance
 E xtends lifespan of
applications
Topics
Architecture
OLTP
Data Warehouse
– Informix has consistently demonstrated
superiority to Oracle in Data Warehousing
by delivering on customers’ systems and
drastically cutting their costs.
• Complex Data / Content Management
Content Management Critical
Success Factors
•
•
•
Integration
– Connectivity to: web servers, browsers, java applets, legacy data
Management, Performance, Cost of Ownership
– single server for all data
– unified and industry endorsed architecture
– scalable architecture
Advanced data types
– audio, video, text, spatial, java, VRML, etc…
– user written and pre-defined (DataBlades)
Informix: Integrated, Simple,
Complete.

Simple interface means fast development
 Optimized access means fast applications
 Single data source means easy administration
 No need for file, scripts, or programs outside the
DB.
Single
Interface
Optimized
Access
Integrated
Data Types (DataBlades):
Documents
HTML
Images
Video
Time Series
Corporate Data
...
Single Universal Server
Informix Connects the Entire
Enterprise to the Web
Java/IIOP
Browser
Web
Server
ActiveX
INFORMIXUniversal
Web Connect™
• Java
• C/C++
•New Era 4GL
•IIOP/CORBA
•DCOM
•Publish and
•Subscribe
Development Tools
Jworks, Web DataBlade, NewEra,
Data Director, Partners...
INFORMIX-Universal
Server
• Web Site
Content
Legacy
Data
• Application
Logic
• Java
Gateways
Management Tools
Informix Enterprise Command Center,
Tools Partners...
Industry View of Informix
Content Management
“For serious new media projects, Informix offers the most
content-inclusive strategy.”
Forrester Research, 9/97
• Analysts agree that Informix’s server
integration is the most efficient
architecture
• Informix has numerous off-the-shelf
DataBlade modules currently available
Oracle’s NCA -- Not a Unified
Architecture
3rdThird
partyParty
ORBORB
• Non-integrated servers
• No extensibility
• No new indexing
• No cartridges
CORBA Objects
Communications
Overhead
Massive Data
Movement
Video Server
OLAP Engine
Client
Application
Server
• CORBA Client • No standard DML
• Not parallel
User code
• No optimizer
• No data integration
Standard
Relational
Performance Problems of Oracle’s
NCA
Call Overhead
Local
Lightweight
Thread
Informix
Oracle
CORBA
Object
1x
10x
100x
1,000x 10,000x
relative time
Oracle’s NCA is 1000X slower than Informix’s Universal
Server in performing a function on an advanced data type.
Performance Problems of Oracle’s
NCA
Data Movement Overhead
Local
Lightweight
Thread
CORBA
Object
Informix
Oracle local object
Oracle remote object
1x
10x
100x
1,000x 10,000x
relative time
Oracle’s NCA is 100 to1000X slower than Informix’s
Universal Server at transferring complex data types
(objects) from the server.
Cost of Ownership: Oracle ‘Do-itYourself’ Approach
‘Do-it-Yourself’ Custom Code
Oracle Code
Relational
Data
BLOBs
Data
Integrator
Optimizer
Object
Simulator
Complex
Geometry
Engine
Text
Spatial
Points
Cost of Ownership: Oracle NCA
Integrity Issues
Transaction Boundary
Data Catridges
Separate
Oracle
Database
Servers
Oracle Application
Server
•
•
•
•
Cartridges outside transaction boundary
No integrity constraints
No standard data manipulation language
No certification program
Oracle’s Competing
Architectures
•
•
•
•
Oracle 7.3 with hard-wired support for 4 data types
– spatial, time series, text media
– separate servers employed for each
Oracle 8.0
– mainly provides patches to scalability and performance issues
– extremely limited object support
Network Computing Architecture (NCA)
– “data catridges” as middle-ware, CORBA interface
– advanced data outside the control and optimization of server
Data Cartridges as part of the server
– perhaps in Oracle 8.1 or 8.2
Performance Appraisal: Industry
View of Oracle’s NCA
“Oracle faces a significant challenge in achieving
adequate performance when interfacing Data Cartridge
functions with core database services.”
Patricia Seybold Group, 2/97
“Oracle 8 will (at least initially) suffer performance
shortcomings compared with the IUS single database
engine..”
Meta Group, 2/97
Informix vs. Oracle: Predefined
Data Types
• Oracle: Few if any Data Catridges are shipping.
• Informix: A sample of available Data Blades...
•
•
Data Warehousing/Financial
•
– DataCleanser DataBlade (EDD)
– OptiLink DataBlade (CPT)
– Fuzzy Search DataBlade (Expector)
– TimeSeries DataBlade (Fame)
– Reporting DataBlade (SLP-Statistiques)
– Decision Series DataBlade (NeoVista)
Text
– Text DataBlade (Verity)
– Text Search/Management DataBlade
(Excalibur)
– NameTag DataBlade (IsoQuest)
– PLS Text DataBlade (PLS)
– Document Objects DataBlade
(ArborText)
• Web/Electronic Commerce
 Digital Media
– Video DataBlade (VXtreme) – LiveLink DataBlade (Open Text)
– PixFactory DataBlade (Kodak)
– DesCrypt DataBlade (Prime Factors)
– Internet Commerce DataBlade (Open Market) – Image Search DataBlade (Excalibur)
– Face Recognition DataBlade (Excalibur)
– Real-time Profiling DataBlade (Excalibur)
– Scene Detection DataBlade (Excalibur)
– Content Management DataBlade (MKS)
Geospatial
– Visual Info Retrieval DataBlade (Virage)
– GeoCoding DataBlade (MapInfo)
– Audio Information Retrieval DataBlade
– Global/Interval DataBlade (Telcontar)
(Muscle Fish)
– Visualization DataBlade (ECOlogic)
Oracle’s Negative Campaigning
Against Informix
“In one of the most vicious smear campaigns in recent
software history, Oracle has been attacking the integrity of
[Informix’s] database”
PC Week 2/17/97
“We believe the actual exposures with Informix’s
DataBlades have been miniscule.”
Gartner Group, 12/96
Web / Conent Wins Over Oracle
•
•
•
•
SouthWestern Bell
Nike
Fidelity
IVillage
Topics
Architecture
OLTP
Data Warehouse
Content Management
– Informix’s Universal Server was designed from
the start for advanced content management.
Oracle 8 and the NCA are cobbled together
components which will not fare well in real
world applications.
• Summary
Summary: Informix
• Informix
–
–
–
–
Mission: Deliver absolute best database technology
Single and extensible server arhitecture
Tight integration with best-of-breed application partners
Results for the Customer:
• lower cost-to-serve
• flexibility and simplicity
• extended lifespan of applications
• clear support for the future enterprise with Universal Server
Summary: Oracle
• Oracle
– Mission: Cover as many bases as possible in the market with
combinations of existing products.
– Lock customers into Oracle products; partner only when
necessary
– Results for the Customer
• higher overall costs due to non-integration
• performance limitations
• expensive services
• questionable path to future with Oracle 8 and NCA