Is it the end of the Relational Dimensional Data Warehouse ?
4 posters
Page 1 of 1
Is it the end of the Relational Dimensional Data Warehouse ?
With all the technologies of cubes, columnar databases, big data, advanced semantic layers, self-service BI and tools like Power Pivot and Power View from Microsoft for example, is it still relevant to build a traditional relational data warehouse? A Kimball like with facts, dimensions (surrogate keys, Slow Changing Dimensions and etc…)
davfaibish- Posts : 1
Join date : 2012-06-11
Re: Is it the end of the Relational Dimensional Data Warehouse ?
Don't believe the marketing hype. Dimensional warehouses will be around for years to come.
BoxesAndLines- Posts : 1212
Join date : 2009-02-03
Location : USA
Re: Is it the end of the Relational Dimensional Data Warehouse ?
Cubes have limited capacity.
Columnar databases are relational.
Structured big data is handled in relational environments (MPP systems). Unstructured data is sometimes. You should remember that the whole point of Hadoop is to address MPP for those who don't have an MPP database system. It is not a replacement, and a very poor substitute when dealing with structured data. It is also very inefficient both in personnel and hardware.
Semantic layers (and 'self service' tools) have, and will continue to coexist with dimensional DW implementations. They are complementary technologies.
Columnar databases are relational.
Structured big data is handled in relational environments (MPP systems). Unstructured data is sometimes. You should remember that the whole point of Hadoop is to address MPP for those who don't have an MPP database system. It is not a replacement, and a very poor substitute when dealing with structured data. It is also very inefficient both in personnel and hardware.
Semantic layers (and 'self service' tools) have, and will continue to coexist with dimensional DW implementations. They are complementary technologies.
Re: Is it the end of the Relational Dimensional Data Warehouse ?
It's definitely not the end.
In-memory solutions actually work better against a star schema than a snow-flake or 3NF solution.
Storing your entire data warehouse in-memory is also not sustainable for large (multi-terabyte) data warehouses.
In-memory has it's place, but obviously has a cost in terms of hardware. Yahoo have a 24Tb SSAS cube (last I heard, probably bigger now) - imagine how expensive that would be to put into memory!
In-memory solutions actually work better against a star schema than a snow-flake or 3NF solution.
Storing your entire data warehouse in-memory is also not sustainable for large (multi-terabyte) data warehouses.
In-memory has it's place, but obviously has a cost in terms of hardware. Yahoo have a 24Tb SSAS cube (last I heard, probably bigger now) - imagine how expensive that would be to put into memory!
Similar topics
» Using the Dimensional Data Warehouse as source data for the OLTP process
» difference between data mart and data warehouse at logical/physical level
» Dimensional DB to completely replace Relational DB
» data warehouse or not ? when is it okay to use OLAP without a data warehouse database
» difference between data mart and data warehouse at logical/physical level
» Dimensional DB to completely replace Relational DB
» data warehouse or not ? when is it okay to use OLAP without a data warehouse database
Page 1 of 1
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum