May 6, 2011 at 7:25 am
Michael Lysons (5/6/2011)
Amazon, definitely.The BBC's web site perhaps. Although, depending on how the site was developed it may not actually use the database that heavily. Still, it'd be kinda cool.
The BBC website already uses SQL Server 2005's Full Text Search feature for its message board search functions:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/bbcinternet/2010/11/trailing_search_on_message_boa.html
Chris
May 6, 2011 at 7:26 am
Stefano - go figure that they only used Excel up until now! That's pretty funny!
May 6, 2011 at 8:12 am
Manufacturers of machinery that operate on a global scale come to mind - like John Deere and Caterpillar.
May 6, 2011 at 8:27 am
I second that -- CIA or NSA. From what I understand, virtually all internet/telecommunications/satellite traffic is vacuumed up by them.
May 6, 2011 at 8:44 am
Nakul Vachhrajani (5/6/2011)
Here in India, we have a saying that if a restauranter does not eat in his/her own restaurant or if a building contractor does not live in buildings they built, then they are no good.Similarly, I have always believed that if a company does not use it's own products, it's not a good product.
I think Microsoft learned this from Sun. Years ago both were using minis or mainframes to handle their systems. Sun converted to SunOS to prove that their OS could handle the load. Of course that was after a few years when the OS has matured.
Same thing for SQL Server. In 1994, SQL Server wouldn't have been a good choice for MS with 50,000 people, but now I think it works fine.
May 6, 2011 at 8:45 am
Visa
May 6, 2011 at 8:53 am
J Thaddeus Klopcic (5/6/2011)
As a former database developer for UPS, I can defintely state that UPS does use SQL Server to process its packages. While the main package database is centrally housed in oue of the world's largest DB2 installations, individual sortation for delivery on the local warehouse level is handled by co-located servers running SQL.If you browse through their press releases of the past several years, anything touted as "Package Flow Technology" is back-ended by SQL Server.
Cool, and thanks. I asked my local driver, but he didn't know.
May 6, 2011 at 9:15 am
J Thaddeus Klopcic (5/6/2011)
As a former database developer for UPS, I can defintely state that UPS does use SQL Server to process its packages. While the main package database is centrally housed in oue of the world's largest DB2 installations, individual sortation for delivery on the local warehouse level is handled by co-located servers running SQL.If you browse through their press releases of the past several years, anything touted as "Package Flow Technology" is back-ended by SQL Server.
Microsoft was wise to invest a lot of development and marketing in it's BI tools, because it allows them to keep a solid foothold in organizations that have traditionally been Oracle or DB2 shops. A few years ago when the company I work for was acquired in a merger, and Oracle was chosen as the platform for the new transactional application database and the ODS. However, we still use SSIS for ETL processes and SSAS and SSRS for reporting. Also, most of the datamarts are running on SQL Server.
"Do not seek to follow in the footsteps of the wise. Instead, seek what they sought." - Matsuo Basho
May 6, 2011 at 9:16 am
Eric M Russell (5/6/2011)
Companies like Google or FaceBook manage a lot of data, but it's not held the same degree of scrutiny. For example, if FaceBook dropped 1 out of 1,000 random guestbook posts, would anyone notice? At the end of the day would they even care enough for it to make national headline news?
That's a great point, and it's one reason why the scalability of NoSQL databases isn't necessarily all it's cracked up to me. Lots of companies don't want to lose 1 random data entry item.
May 6, 2011 at 9:21 am
Eric M Russell (5/6/2011)
What I would find impressive are case studies about state or even federal government agencies, like the IRS or the California Department Of Motor Vehicles, using SQL Server as their primary transactional or operational data store. Not only do they manage a tremendous amount of data, but every record is operational and subject to close scrutiny at any moment. If you drop just one motor vehicle registration or tax record, someone is eventually going to notice, and they are going to care... and care a lot.Companies like Google or FaceBook manage a lot of data, but it's not held the same degree of scrutiny. For example, if FaceBook dropped 1 out of 1,000 random guestbook posts, would anyone notice? At the end of the day would they even care enough for it to make national headline news?
If you did a Google search on "3d modeling software", and the search engine truncated the first 10 listings, would you even know? Search engine results are dynamic based on things your geo location and previous searches, so you don't know you're missing something that you're weren't expecting in the first palce, unless you're an engineer and scientifically testing the system, looking for a specific set of results in response to a specific set of input parameters.
I spent some time with a senior dba from the agency that handles income tax for California. He said the main app ran on db2, but there were many satellite systems that used sql server. Nothing 'mission critical', though.
May 6, 2011 at 10:02 am
Steve Jones - SSC Editor (5/6/2011)
Nakul Vachhrajani (5/6/2011)
Here in India, we have a saying that if a restauranter does not eat in his/her own restaurant or if a building contractor does not live in buildings they built, then they are no good.Similarly, I have always believed that if a company does not use it's own products, it's not a good product.
I think Microsoft learned this from Sun. Years ago both were using minis or mainframes to handle their systems. Sun converted to SunOS to prove that their OS could handle the load. Of course that was after a few years when the OS has matured.
Same thing for SQL Server. In 1994, SQL Server wouldn't have been a good choice for MS with 50,000 people, but now I think it works fine.
There had been a consistent rumor throughout the 1990's that Microsoft used IBM AS400's for all of their backend storage. Since I was working on the AS400 at the time it always seemed odd to me. The shops I worked in were trying hard not to let that Microsoft "junk" (junk is one of the kinder terms I heard) in.
Now look... I'm heavy into SQL Server and .NET and only brush up against the AS400 (now called the i) occasionally. 😀
May 6, 2011 at 11:24 am
Steve I remember Kevin Cox from MS mentioning at a user group meeting last year that Major League Baseball was a already SQL Server user. I believe he talked about their use of cubes, so I'm not sure to what extent they used it as a relational engine. The main point I remember Kevin making is that Bob Costas got involved in one of their meetings to provide impromptu advice when they were designing the cube.
Since SQL Server is as a transactional DB, I would like to see case studies of it used in that type of environment. Many high-volume systems like Google and Facebook are not truly transactional. Credit card processing is already using SQL Server in some cases, so is Sports Betting. How about for tracking cell phone calls and billing? Verizon and AT&T must have very high transaction/second rates.
LinkedIn - http://www.linkedin.com/in/carlosbossy
Blog - http://www.carlosbossy.com
Follow me - @carlosbossy
May 6, 2011 at 1:38 pm
David in .AU (5/6/2011)
I would love it if IBM used SQL Server as the database for Tivoli Netcool for storing all the monitoring data and the topology database.I have experienced it using DB2 and MySQL (the former runs particularly badly) and reckon it would handle the load really well (if properly maintained by someone who knows what performance tuning is).
I think it would also help fight the stigma that Microsoft has in the RDMS arena 🙂
Hi David, we set up our Tivoli monitoring to work with SQL Server 2005 at the time...it was a pain, not due to any issues with SQL, but because it seems that IBM simply ported the underlying schema from DB2. For example, not one single table had a clustered index, they were all nonclustered, and it took me awhile to cluster the essential indexes properly. In this case, I also hope that IBM does Tivoli properly as well. 🙂
Gaby________________________________________________________________"In theory, theory and practice are the same. In practice, they are not." - Albert Einstein
May 6, 2011 at 5:48 pm
Schodoodles (5/6/2011)
SQL Server is already used by F1 teams .... a quick web search finds that Microsoft has this as one of their case studies... maybe I'm one of the last to just read up on this properly!Wish I was the DBA that needed to be track side....
I only very recently came across the same case study, I work with SQL Server all day and I'm also an F1 fan.
To me, that example is a very impressive one:
* Speed is critical (db & car)
* Reliability must be top notch (crashes = bad)
* The applications it needs to integrate with vary widely
* It's used for heavy volumes of both OLTP-style monitoring of data feeds and BI mining on large historical data sets
* Millions of dollars are at stake and the margins for error are getting smaller every day.
* I almost forgot... if there is a problem, the results are televised... live.... worldwide.
Color me impressed!! :hehe:
Phil Helmer
Database Engineer
May 6, 2011 at 6:22 pm
Not sure about SQL Server, but Oracle's licensing specifically does not support Air Traffic Control systems or Nuclear facilities.
Viewing 15 posts - 31 through 45 (of 66 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply