Amazon Web Services Announces Amazon Redshift
From the post:
Amazon Web Services, Inc. today announced that Amazon Redshift, a managed, petabyte-scale data warehouse service in the cloud, is now broadly available for use.
Since Amazon Redshift was announced at the AWS re: Invent conference in November 2012, customers using the service during the limited preview have ranged from startups to global enterprises, with datasets from terabytes to petabytes, across industries including social, gaming, mobile, advertising, manufacturing, healthcare, e-commerce, and financial services.
Traditional data warehouses require significant time and resource to administer. In addition, the financial cost associated with building, maintaining, and growing self-managed, on-premise data warehouses is very high. Amazon Redshift aims to lower the cost of a data warehouse and make it easy to analyze large amounts of data very quickly.
Amazon Redshift uses columnar data storage, advanced compression, and high performance IO and network to achieve higher performance than traditional databases for data warehousing and analytics workloads. Redshift is currently available in the US East (N. Virginia) Region and will be rolled out to other AWS Regions in the coming months.
“When we set out to build Amazon Redshift, we wanted to leverage the massive scale of AWS to deliver ten times the performance at 1/10 the cost of on-premise data warehouses in use today,” said Raju Gulabani, Vice President of Database Services, Amazon Web Services….
Amazon Web Services
Wondering what impact a 90% reduction in cost, if borne out over a variety of customers, will have on the cost of on-premise data warehouses?
Suspect the cost for on-premise warehouses will go up because there will be a smaller market for the hardware and people to run them.
Something to consider as a startup that wants to deliver big data services.
Do you really want your own server room/farm, etc.?
Or for that matter, will VCs ask: Why are you allocating funds to a server farm?
PS: Amazon “Redshift” is another example of semantic pollution. “Redshift” had (past tense) a well know and generally accepted semantic. Well, except for the other dozen or so meanings for “redshift” that I counted in less than a minute.
Sigh, semantic confusion continues unabated.