Take the 2-minute tour ×
Database Administrators Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for database professionals who wish to improve their database skills and learn from others in the community. It's 100% free, no registration required.

I need a database engine that can utilize multiple servers for processing a single SQL query in parallel. So far I know that this is possible with the some engines, though none of them are feasible for me either because of pricing or missing features. The engines currently known to me are:

  • MS SQL (enterprise)
  • DB2 (enterprise)
  • Oracle (enterprise)
  • GridSQL
  • Greenplum

Which other engines have this feature? Do you have any experience with using this feature?

Edit: I have now proposed a method for creating one myself. Any input is welcome.

Edit2: I have found another one: Informix Extended Parallel Server

Edit3: Stado is a new one.

Edit4: Maybe also pgpool-II, they write:

Parallel Query

Using the parallel query function, data can be divided among the multiple servers, so that a query can be executed on all the servers concurrently to reduce the overall execution time.

share|improve this question

migrated from serverfault.com Jan 14 '12 at 3:34

This question came from our site for system and network administrators.

closed as not a real question by jcolebrand Jan 15 '12 at 5:25

It's difficult to tell what is being asked here. This question is ambiguous, vague, incomplete, overly broad, or rhetorical and cannot be reasonably answered in its current form. For help clarifying this question so that it can be reopened, visit the help center.If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

1  
What is the question? Are you looking for more engines? Experience with these specific engines? –  pehrs Mar 12 '10 at 16:23
1  
Have a look at Vertica. –  eevar Feb 5 '11 at 0:59
1  
I think Oracle's Exadata also does this. But I'm not sure how different it is from the "regular" Oracle DBMS –  a_horse_with_no_name Jan 14 '12 at 12:25
1  
Look at your edits. Look at your self-answers (of which, a link-only ... which those were "Aster Data is another one." is a link only answer ... of which a link-only answer you had several) were not "answers". The question was migrated here because it's not in line with the ServerFault vision. The question does not seem objective to me. By what criteria will you judge rightness? It appears you merely want a list. If there were a way to judge correctness, or appropriateness to your question, I would see it as objective. List answer questions are referred to as "shopping questions" here. –  jcolebrand Jan 16 '12 at 14:38
1  
If you still find objection that this question should not have been closed, I encourage you to visit Database Administrators Meta and open a question there tagged discussion and ask if this question should truly have been closed. There it will help us found a guideline for the site, and will have participation from many members, not just you and me in a comment discussion. Alternately, visit Database Administrators Chat and you can discuss it with any of the site's many regulars. –  jcolebrand Jan 16 '12 at 14:41

3 Answers 3

Look into Hive:

http://wiki.apache.org/hadoop/Hive

It's free and scales very well.

A new presentation was posted recently with updated numbers:

http://www.slideshare.net/ragho/hive-icde-2010

also see

http://wiki.apache.org/hadoop/Hive/Presentations

share|improve this answer

Pretty much anything which is going to scale across multiple servers is going to be pricy.

With SQL Server you'll need to wait for SQL 2008 R2, then it's only a data warehouse solution. With Oracle you've got RAC which is very hard to setup. I don't have any experience with the other solutions.

Be prepared to spend from the high 6 to low 7 figures to get something like this up and running.

share|improve this answer
1  
also, as far as I know, RAC only distributes the query processing, it still requires shared storage, so it doesn't help you distribute IO load. –  Justin Mar 13 '10 at 0:23

This could be interesting for you (no cluster needed, but multiple mount points would be nice):

http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/data/library/dmmag/DBMag_2009_Issue1/DBMag_Issue109_DistributedDBA/index.html

And also how about you check DB2 EEE - cluster database solution (shared nothing by design) - I guess similar to a sharding implementation :

www.ibm.com/developerworks/data/library/techarticle/0205parlapalli/0205parlapalli.html

Friends don't let friends use Oracle (I kid Oracle, great product!)

And of course there are always noSQL approaches but you said SQL Engine

share|improve this answer

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.