Anybody read the IBM Information Management Magazine?

Did anyone who read the magazine read the non-Informix articles? IBM is clearly cognizant about the capabilities of Hadoop, but something is lost in translation. The DB2 centric authors don't understand Hadoop/HBase so they can't communicate anything beyond the initial point... Hadoop really good at handling massive amounts of data. Hadoop can output to your relational database as a sink. IBM clearly also recognizes that what constitutes as a 'very large' database has lost its meaning. An example is the National Mamogram database. They don't store the mamograms in the database, but just the indexing/meta data that describes the image. So is that really a large database? And yet in these articles, IBM glosses over the reason why Hadoop/Hbase is attractive. Using the mamo database, one could store the meta data information in HBase and have incredible fast access all at the price of a single license of IDS or DB2. Is HBase perfect? No. Lots of gaps that you don't have in a mature seasoned Relational Database. (Relational Databases are 30+ years old. HBase? not so much.) -G _________________________________________________________________ Your E-mail and More On-the-Go. Get Windows Live Hotmail Free. http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/201469229/direct/01/