<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Web 2.0 This Week (Sept 25 &#8211; Oct 1)</title>
	<atom:link href="http://techcrunch.com/2005/10/02/web-20-this-week-sept-25-oct-1/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://techcrunch.com/2005/10/02/web-20-this-week-sept-25-oct-1/</link>
	<description>Startup and Technology News</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 16 Mar 2012 08:03:57 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: mark madsen</title>
		<link>http://techcrunch.com/2005/10/02/web-20-this-week-sept-25-oct-1/#comment-3074</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[mark madsen]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 03 Aug 2008 20:46:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.techcrunch.com/?p=274#comment-3074</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[They didn&#039;t buy Vertica, Paraccel or any of the other vendors because those vendors have tight integration with the database kernel, and because in some cases the technology is incompatible, e.g. these two are columnar storage so the optimization and indexing techniques are not going to be the same.

Datallegro  doesn&#039;t appear to have extensive experience in parallel databases. They built something akin to a federation layer on top of the database, making it easier to port to SQLServer.  With a very small customer base relative to the other vendors, one has to question their approach vs. tight database integration, since every other vendor on the market does that. It&#039;s more likely that you do need this, and the layer doesn&#039;t work so well. So MSFT bought something in order to make a move inthe DB market and put pressure on competitors, without having to worry about releasing something workable in the short term.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>They didn&#8217;t buy Vertica, Paraccel or any of the other vendors because those vendors have tight integration with the database kernel, and because in some cases the technology is incompatible, e.g. these two are columnar storage so the optimization and indexing techniques are not going to be the same.</p>
<p>Datallegro  doesn&#8217;t appear to have extensive experience in parallel databases. They built something akin to a federation layer on top of the database, making it easier to port to SQLServer.  With a very small customer base relative to the other vendors, one has to question their approach vs. tight database integration, since every other vendor on the market does that. It&#8217;s more likely that you do need this, and the layer doesn&#8217;t work so well. So MSFT bought something in order to make a move inthe DB market and put pressure on competitors, without having to worry about releasing something workable in the short term.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Nima Negahban</title>
		<link>http://techcrunch.com/2005/10/02/web-20-this-week-sept-25-oct-1/#comment-3073</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Nima Negahban]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 31 Jul 2008 10:39:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.techcrunch.com/?p=274#comment-3073</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Interesting. Wonder if they&#039;re going to buy Vertica next or I wonder why they didn&#039;t buy Vertica. Both of these companies have extensive experience in parallel db&#039;s. If you read the fine print behind SQL 2008 you will see that they are working very hard to build in some very interesting scaling functionality.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Interesting. Wonder if they&#8217;re going to buy Vertica next or I wonder why they didn&#8217;t buy Vertica. Both of these companies have extensive experience in parallel db&#8217;s. If you read the fine print behind SQL 2008 you will see that they are working very hard to build in some very interesting scaling functionality.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

