(bright music) >> Hi, everybody, this is Dave Vellante, welcome back to Supercloud 2. Last August, at the first Supercloud event, we invited the broader community to help further define Supercloud, we assessed its viability, and identified the critical elements and deployment models of the concept. The objectives here at Supercloud too are, first of all, to continue to tighten and test the concept, the second is, we want to get real world input from practitioners on the problems that they're facing and the viability of Supercloud in terms of applying it to their business. So on the program, we got companies like Walmart, Sachs, Western Union, Ionis Pharmaceuticals, NASDAQ, and others. And the third thing that we want to do is we want to drill into the intersection of cloud and data to project what the future looks like in the context of Supercloud. So in this segment, we want to explore the concept of data architectures and what's going to be required for Supercloud. And I'm pleased to welcome one of our Supercloud sponsors, ChaosSearch, Ed Walsh is the CEO of the company, with Thomas Hazel, who's the Founder, CTO, and Chief Scientist. Guys, good to see you again, thanks for coming into our Marlborough studio. >> Always great. >> Great to be here. >> Okay, so there's a little debate, I'm going to put you right in the spot. (Ed chuckling) A little debate going on in the community started by Bob Muglia, a former CEO of Snowflake, and he was at Microsoft for a long time, and he looked at the Supercloud definition, said, "I think you need to tighten it up a little bit." So, here's what he came up with. He said, "A Supercloud is a platform that provides a programmatically consistent set of services hosted on heterogeneous cloud providers." So he's calling it a platform, not an architecture, which was kind of interesting. And so presumably the platform owner is going to be responsible for the architecture, but Dr. Nelu Mihai, who's a computer scientist behind the Cloud of Clouds Project, he chimed in and responded with the following. He said, "Cloud is a programming paradigm supporting the entire lifecycle of applications with data and logic natively distributed. Supercloud is an open architecture that integrates heterogeneous clouds in an agnostic manner." So, Ed, words matter. Is this an architecture or is it a platform? >> Put us on the spot. So, I'm sure you have concepts, I would say it's an architectural or design principle. Listen, I look at Supercloud as a mega trend, just like cloud, just like data analytics. And some companies are using the principle, design principles, to literally get dramatically ahead of everyone else. I mean, things you couldn't possibly do if you didn't use cloud principles, right? So I think it's a Supercloud effect, you're able to do things you're not able to. So I think it's more a design principle, but if you do it right, you get dramatic effect as far as customer value. >> So the conversation that we were having with Muglia, and Tristan Handy of dbt Labs, was, I'll set it up as the following, and, Thomas, would love to get your thoughts, if you have a CRM, think about applications today, it's all about forms and codifying business processes, you type a bunch of stuff into Salesforce, and all the salespeople do it, and this machine generates a forecast. What if you have this new type of data app that pulls data from the transaction system, the e-commerce, the supply chain, the partner ecosystem, et cetera, and then, without humans, actually comes up with a plan. That's their vision. And Muglia was saying, in order to do that, you need to rethink data architectures and database architectures specifically, you need to get down to the level of how the data is stored on the disc. What are your thoughts on that? Well, first of all, I'm going to cop out, I think it's actually both. I do think it's a design principle, I think it's not open technology, but open APIs, open access, and you can build a platform on that design principle architecture. Now, I'm a database person, I love solving the database problems. >> I'm waited for you to launch into this. >> Yeah, so I mean, you know, Snowflake is a database, right? It's a distributed database. And we wanted to crack those codes, because, multi-region, multi-cloud, customers wanted access to their data, and their data is in a variety of forms, all these services that you're talked about. And so what I saw as a core principle was cloud object storage, everyone streams their data to cloud object storage. From there we said, well, how about we rethink database architecture, rethink file format, so that we can take each one of these services and bring them together, whether distributively or centrally, such that customers can access and get answers, whether it's operational data, whether it's business data, AKA search, or SQL, complex distributed joins. But we had to rethink the architecture. I like to say we're not a first generation, or a second, we're a third generation distributed database on pure, pure cloud storage, no caching, no SSDs. Why? Because all that availability, the cost of time, is a struggle, and cloud object storage, we think, is the answer. >> So when you're saying no caching, so when I think about how companies are solving some, you know, pretty hairy problems, take MySQL Heatwave, everybody thought Oracle was going to just forget about MySQL, well, they come out with Heatwave. And the way they solve problems, and you see their benchmarks against Amazon, "Oh, we crush everybody," is they put it all in memory. So you said no caching? You're not getting performance through caching? How is that true, and how are you getting performance? >> Well, so five, six years ago, right? When you realize that cloud object storage is going to be everywhere, and it's going to be a core foundational, if you will, fabric, what would you do? Well, a lot of times the second generation say, "We'll take it out of cloud storage, put in SSDs or something, and put into cache." And that adds a lot of time, adds a lot of costs. But I said, what if, what if we could actually make the first read hot, the first read distributed joins and searching? And so what we went out to do was said, we can't cache, because that's adds time, that adds cost. We have to make cloud object storage high performance, like it feels like a caching SSD. That's where our patents are, that's where our technology is, and we've spent many years working towards this. So, to me, if you can crack that code, a lot of these issues we're talking about, multi-region, multicloud, different services, everybody wants to send their data to the data lake, but then they move it out, we said, "Keep it right there." >> You nailed it, the data gravity. So, Bob's right, the data's coming in, and you need to get the data from everywhere, but you need an environment that you can deal with all that different schema, all the different type of technology, but also at scale. Bob's right, you cannot use memory or SSDs to cache that, that doesn't scale, it doesn't scale cost effectively. But if you could, and what you did, is you made object storage, S3 first, but object storage, the only persistence by doing that. And then we get performance, we should talk about it, it's literally, you know, hundreds of terabytes of queries, and it's done in seconds, it's done without memory caching. We have concepts of caching, but the only caching, the only persistence, is actually when we're doing caching, we're just keeping another side-eye track of things on the S3 itself. So we're using, actually, the object storage to be a database, which is kind of where Bob was saying, we agree, but that's what you started at, people thought you were crazy. >> And maybe make it live. Don't think of it as archival or temporary space, make it live, real time streaming, operational data. What we do is make it smart, we see the data coming in, we uniquely index it such that you can get your use cases, that are search, observability, security, or backend operational. But we don't have to have this, I dunno, static, fixed, siloed type of architecture technologies that were traditionally built prior to Supercloud thinking. >> And you don't have to move everything, essentially, you can do it wherever the data lands, whatever cloud across the globe, you're able to bring it together, you get the cost effectiveness, because the only persistence is the cheapest storage persistent layer you can buy. But the key thing is you cracked the code. >> We had to crack the code, right? That was the key thing. >> That's where the plans are. >> And then once you do that, then everything else gets easier to scale, your architecture, across regions, across cloud. >> Now, it's a general purpose database, as Bob was saying, but we use that database to solve a particular issue, which is around operational data, right? So, we agree with Bob's. >> Interesting. So this brings me to this concept of data, Jimata Gan is one of our speakers, you know, we talk about data fabric, which is a NetApp, originally NetApp concept, Gartner's kind of co-opted it. But so, the basic concept is, data lives everywhere, whether it's an S3 bucket, or a SQL database, or a data lake, it's just a node on the data mesh. So in your view, how does this fit in with Supercloud? Ed, you've said that you've built, essentially, an enabler for that, for the data mesh, I think you're an enabler for the Supercloud-like principles. This is a big, chewy opportunity, and it requires, you know, a team approach. There's got to be an ecosystem, there's not going to be one Supercloud to rule them all, so where does the ecosystem fit into the discussion, and where do you fit into the ecosystem? >> Right, so we agree completely, there's not one Supercloud in effect, but we use Supercloud principles to build our platform, and then, you know, the ecosystem's going to be built on leveraging what everyone else's secret powers are, right? So our power, our superpower, based upon what we built is, we deal with, if you're having any scale, or cost effective scale issues, with data, machine generated data, like business observability or security data, we are your force multiplier, we will take that in singularly, just let it, simply put it in your object storage wherever it sits, and we give you uniformity access to that using OpenAPI access, SQL, or you know, Elasticsearch API. So, that's what we do, that's our superpower. So I'll play it into data mesh, that's a perfect, we are a node on a data mesh, but I'll play it in the soup about how, the ecosystem, we see it kind of playing, and we talked about it in just in the last couple days, how we see this kind of possibly. Short term, our superpowers, we deal with this data that's coming at these environments, people, customers, building out observability or security environments, or vendors that are selling their own Supercloud, I do observability, the Datadogs of the world, dot dot dot, the Splunks of the world, dot dot dot, and security. So what we do is we fit in naturally. What we do is a cost effective scale, just land it anywhere in the world, we deal with ingest, and it's a cost effective, an order of magnitude, or two or three order magnitudes more cost effective. Allows them, their customers are asking them to do the impossible, "Give me fast monitoring alerting. I want it snappy, but I want it to keep two years of data, (laughs) and I want it cost effective." It doesn't work. They're good at the fast monitoring alerting, we're good at the long-term retention. And yet there's some gray area between those two, but one to one is actually cheaper, so we would partner. So the first ecosystem plays, who wants to have the ability to, really, all the data's in those same environments, the security observability players, they can literally, just through API, drag our data into their point to grab. We can make it seamless for customers. Right now, we make it helpful to customers. Your Datadog, we make a button, easy go from Datadog to us for logs, save you money. Same thing with Grafana. But you can also look at ecosystem, those same vendors, it used to be a year ago it was, you know, its all about how can you grow, like it's growth at all costs, now it's about cogs. So literally we can go an environment, you supply what your customer wants, but we can help with cogs. And one-on one in a partnership is better than you trying to build on your own. >> Thomas, you were saying you make the first read fast, so you think about Snowflake. Everybody wants to talk about Snowflake and Databricks. So, Snowflake, great, but you got to get the data in there. All right, so that's, can you help with that problem? >> I mean we want simple in, right? And if you have to have structure in, you're not simple. So the idea that you have a simple in, data lake, schema read type philosophy, but schema right type performance. And so what I wanted to do, what we have done, is have that simple lake, and stream that data real time, and those access points of Search or SQL, to go after whatever business case you need, security observability, warehouse integration. But the key thing is, how do I make that click, click, click answer, and do it quickly? And so what we want to do is, that first read has to be fast. Why? 'Cause then you're going to do all this siloing, layers, complexity. If your first read's not fast, you're at a disadvantage, particularly in cost. And nobody says I want less data, but everyone has to, whether they say we're going to shorten the window, we're going to use AI to choose, but in a security moment, when you don't have that answer, you're in trouble. And that's why we are this service, this Supercloud service, if you will, providing access, well-known search, well-known SQL type access, that if you just have one access point, you're at a disadvantage. >> We actually talked about Snowflake and BigQuery, and a different platform, Data Bricks. That's kind of where we see the phase two of ecosystem. One is easy, the low-hanging fruit is observability and security firms. But the next one is, what we do, our super power is dealing with this messy data that schema is changing like night and day. Pipelines are tough, and it's changing all the time, but you want these things fast, and it's big data around the world. That's the next point, just use us alongside, or inside, one of their platforms, and now we get the best of both worlds. Our superpower is keeping this messy data as a streaming, okay, not a batch thing, allow you to do that. So, that's the second one. And then to be honest, the third one, which plays you to Supercloud, it also plays perfectly in the data mesh, is if you really go to the ultimate thing, what we have done is made object storage, S3, GCS, and blob storage, we made it a database. Put, get, complex query with big joins. You know, so back to your original thing, and Muglia teed it up perfectly, we've done that. Now imagine if that's an ecosystem, who would want that? If it's, again, it's uniform available across all the regions, across all the clouds, and it's right next to where you are building a service, or a client's trying, that's where the ecosystem, I think people are going to use Superclouds for their superpowers. We're really good at this, allows that short term. I think the Snowflakes and the Data Bricks are the medium term, you know? And then I think eventually gets to, hey, listen if you can make object storage fast, you can just go after it with simple SQL queries, or elastic. Who would want that? I think that's where people are going to leverage it. It's not going to be one Supercloud, and we leverage the super clouds. >> Our viewpoint is smart object storage can be programmable, and so we agree with Bob, but we're not saying do it here, do it here. This core, fundamental layer across regions, across clouds, that everyone has? Simple in. Right now, it's hard to get data in for access for analysis. So we said, simply, we'll automate the entire process, give you API access across regions, across clouds. And again, how do you do a distributed join that's fast? How do you do a distributed join that doesn't cost you an arm or a leg? And how do you do it at scale? And that's where we've been focused. >> So prior, the cloud object store was a niche. >> Yeah. >> S3 obviously changed that. How standard is, essentially, object store across the different cloud platforms? Is that a problem for you? Is that an easy thing to solve? >> Well, let's talk about it. I mean we've fundamentally, yeah we've extracted it, but fundamentally, cloud object storage, put, get, and list. That's why it's so scalable, 'cause it doesn't have all these other components. That complexity is where we have moved up, and provide direct analytical API access. So because of its simplicity, and costs, and security, and reliability, it can scale naturally. I mean, really, distributed object storage is easy, it's put-get anywhere, now what we've done is we put a layer of intelligence, you know, call it smart object storage, where access is simple. So whether it's multi-region, do a query across, or multicloud, do a query across, or hunting, searching. >> We've had clients doing Amazon and Google, we have some Azure, but we see Amazon and Google more, and it's a consistent service across all of them. Just literally put your data in the bucket of choice, or folder of choice, click a couple buttons, literally click that to say "that's hot," and after that, it's hot, you can see it. But we're not moving data, the data gravity issue, that's the other. That it's already natively flowing to these pools of object storage across different regions and clouds. We don't move it, we index it right there, we're spinning up stateless compute, back to the Supercloud concept. But now that allows us to do all these other things, right? >> And it's no longer just cheap and deep object storage. Right? >> Yeah, we make it the same, like you have an analytic platform regardless of where you're at, you don't have to worry about that. Yeah, we deal with that, we deal with a stateless compute coming up -- >> And make it programmable. Be able to say, "I want this bucket to provide these answers." Right, that's really the hope, the vision. And the complexity to build the entire stack, and then connect them together, we said, the fabric is cloud storage, we just provide the intelligence on top. >> Let's bring it back to the customers, and one of the things we're exploring in Supercloud too is, you know, is Supercloud a solution looking for a problem? Is a multicloud really a problem? I mean, you hear, you know, a lot of the vendor marketing says, "Oh, it's a disaster, because it's all different across the clouds." And I talked to a lot of customers even as part of Supercloud too, they're like, "Well, I solved that problem by just going mono cloud." Well, but then you're not able to take advantage of a lot of the capabilities and the primitives that, you know, like Google's data, or you like Microsoft's simplicity, their RPA, whatever it is. So what are customers telling you, what are their near term problems that they're trying to solve today, and how are they thinking about the future? >> Listen, it's a real problem. I think it started, I think this is a a mega trend, just like cloud. Just, cloud data, and I always add, analytics, are the mega trends. If you're looking at those, if you're not considering using the Supercloud principles, in other words, leveraging what I have, abstracting it out, and getting the most out of that, and then build value on top, I think you're not going to be able to keep up, In fact, no way you're going to keep up with this data volume. It's a geometric challenge, and you're trying to do linear things. So clients aren't necessarily asking, hey, for Supercloud, but they're really saying, I need to have a better mechanism to simplify this and get value across it, and how do you abstract that out to do that? And that's where they're obviously, our conversations are more amazed what we're able to do, and what they're able to do with our platform, because if you think of what we've done, the S3, or GCS, or object storage, is they can't imagine the ingest, they can't imagine how easy, time to glass, one minute, no matter where it lands in the world, querying this in seconds for hundreds of terabytes squared. People are amazed, but that's kind of, so they're not asking for that, but they are amazed. And then when you start talking on it, if you're an enterprise person, you're building a big cloud data platform, or doing data or analytics, if you're not trying to leverage the public clouds, and somehow leverage all of them, and then build on top, then I think you're missing it. So they might not be asking for it, but they're doing it. >> And they're looking for a lens, you mentioned all these different services, how do I bring those together quickly? You know, our viewpoint, our service, is I have all these streams of data, create a lens where they want to go after it via search, go after via SQL, bring them together instantly, no e-tailing out, no define this table, put into this database. We said, let's have a service that creates a lens across all these streams, and then make those connections. I want to take my CRM with my Google AdWords, and maybe my Salesforce, how do I do analysis? Maybe I want to hunt first, maybe I want to join, maybe I want to add another stream to it. And so our viewpoint is, it's so natural to get into these lake platforms and then provide lenses to get that access. >> And they don't want it separate, they don't want something different here, and different there. They want it basically -- >> So this is our industry, right? If something new comes out, remember virtualization came out, "Oh my God, this is so great, it's going to solve all these problems." And all of a sudden it just got to be this big, more complex thing. Same thing with cloud, you know? It started out with S3, and then EC2, and now hundreds and hundreds of different services. So, it's a complex matter for a lot of people, and this creates problems for customers, especially when you got divisions that are using different clouds, and you're saying that the solution, or a solution for the part of the problem, is to really allow the data to stay in place on S3, use that standard, super simple, but then give it what, Ed, you've called superpower a couple of times, to make it fast, make it inexpensive, and allow you to do that across clouds. >> Yeah, yeah. >> I'll give you guys the last word on that. >> No, listen, I think, we think Supercloud allows you to do a lot more. And for us, data, everyone says more data, more problems, more budget issue, everyone knows more data is better, and we show you how to do it cost effectively at scale. And we couldn't have done it without the design principles of we're leveraging the Supercloud to get capabilities, and because we use super, just the object storage, we're able to get these capabilities of ingest, scale, cost effectiveness, and then we built on top of this. In the end, a database is a data platform that allows you to go after everything distributed, and to get one platform for analytics, no matter where it lands, that's where we think the Supercloud concepts are perfect, that's where our clients are seeing it, and we're kind of excited about it. >> Yeah a third generation database, Supercloud database, however we want to phrase it, and make it simple, but provide the value, and make it instant. >> Guys, thanks so much for coming into the studio today, I really thank you for your support of theCUBE, and theCUBE community, it allows us to provide events like this and free content. I really appreciate it. >> Oh, thank you. >> Thank you. >> All right, this is Dave Vellante for John Furrier in theCUBE community, thanks for being with us today. You're watching Supercloud 2, keep it right there for more thought provoking discussions around the future of cloud and data. (bright music)

(light music) >> Hi everybody. Welcome to this Cube Conversation. I'm really pleased to announce a collaboration with Rob Strechay. He's a guest cube analyst, and we'll be working together to extract the signal from the noise. Rob is a long-time product pro, working at a number of firms including AWS, HP, HPE, NetApp, Snowplow. I did a stint as an analyst at Enterprise Strategy Group. Rob, good to see you. Thanks for coming into our Marlboro Studios. >> Well, thank you for having me. It's always great to be here. >> I'm really excited about working with you. We've known each other for a long time. You've been in the Cube a bunch. You know, you're in between gigs, and I think we can have a lot of fun together. Covering events, covering trends. So. let's get into it. What's happening out there? We're sort of exited the isolation economy. Things were booming. Now, everybody's tapping the brakes. From your standpoint, what are you seeing out there? >> Yeah. I'm seeing that people are really looking how to get more out of their data. How they're bringing things together, how they're looking at the costs of Cloud, and understanding how are they building out their SaaS applications. And understanding that when they go in and actually start to use Cloud, it's not only just using the base services anymore. They're looking at, how do I use these platforms as a service? Some are easier than others, and they're trying to understand, how do I get more value out of that relationship with the Cloud? They're also consolidating the number of Clouds that they have, I would say to try to better optimize their spend, and getting better pricing for that matter. >> Are you seeing people unhook Clouds, or just reduce maybe certain Cloud activities and going maybe instead of 60/40 going 90/10? >> Correct. It's more like the 90/10 type of rule where they're starting to say, Hey I'm not going to get rid of Azure or AWS or Google. I'm going to move a portion of this over that I was using on this one service. Maybe I got a great two-year contract to start with on this platform as a service or a database as a service. I'm going to unhook from that and maybe go with an independent. Maybe with something like a Snowflake or a Databricks on top of another Cloud, so that I can consolidate down. But it also gives them more flexibility as well. >> In our last breaking analysis, Rob, we identified six factors that were reducing Cloud consumption. There were factors and customer tactics. And I want to get your take on this. So, some of the factors really, you got fewer mortgage originations. FinTech, obviously big Cloud user. Crypto, not as much activity there. Lower ad spending means less Cloud. And then one of 'em, which you kind of disagreed with was less, less analytics, you know, fewer... Less frequency of calculations. I'll come back to that. But then optimizing compute using Graviton or AMD instances moving to cheaper storage tiers. That of course makes sense. And then optimize pricing plans. Maybe going from On Demand, you know, to, you know, instead of pay by the drink, buy in volume. Okay. So, first of all, do those make sense to you with the exception? We'll come back and talk about the analytics piece. Is that what you're seeing from customers? >> Yeah, I think so. I think that was pretty much dead on with what I'm seeing from customers and the ones that I go out and talk to. A lot of times they're trying to really monetize their, you know, understand how their business utilizes these Clouds. And, where their spend is going in those Clouds. Can they use, you know, lower tiers of storage? Do they really need the best processors? Do they need to be using Intel or can they get away with AMD or Graviton 2 or 3? Or do they need to move in? And, I think when you look at all of these Clouds, they always have pricing curves that are arcs from the newest to the oldest stuff. And you can play games with that. And understanding how you can actually lower your costs by looking at maybe some of the older generation. Maybe your application was written 10 years ago. You don't necessarily have to be on the best, newest processor for that application per se. >> So last, I want to come back to this whole analytics piece. Last June, I think it was June, Dev Ittycheria, who's the-- I call him Dev. Spelled Dev, pronounced Dave. (chuckles softly) Same pronunciation, different spelling. Dev Ittycheria, CEO of Mongo, on the earnings call. He was getting, you know, hit. Things were starting to get a little less visible in terms of, you know, the outlook. And people were pushing him like... Because you're in the Cloud, is it easier to dial down? And he said, because we're the document database, we support transaction applications. We're less discretionary than say, analytics. Well on the Snowflake earnings call, that same month or the month after, they were all over Slootman and Scarpelli. Oh, the Mongo CEO said that they're less discretionary than analytics. And Snowflake was an interesting comment. They basically said, look, we're the Cloud. You can dial it up, you can dial it down, but the area under the curve over a period of time is going to be the same, because they get their customers to commit. What do you say? You disagreed with the notion that people are running their calculations less frequently. Is that because they're trying to do a better job of targeting customers in near real time? What are you seeing out there? >> Yeah, I think they're moving away from using people and more expensive marketing. Or, they're trying to figure out what's my Google ad spend, what's my Meta ad spend? And what they're trying to do is optimize that spend. So, what is the return on advertising, or the ROAS as they would say. And what they're looking to do is understand, okay, I have to collect these analytics that better understand where are these people coming from? How do they get to my site, to my store, to my whatever? And when they're using it, how do they they better move through that? What you're also seeing is that analytics is not only just for kind of the retail or financial services or things like that, but then they're also, you know, using that to make offers in those categories. When you move back to more, you know, take other companies that are building products and SaaS delivered products. They may actually go and use this analytics for making the product better. And one of the big reasons for that is maybe they're dialing back how many product managers they have. And they're looking to be more data driven about how they actually go and build the product out or enhance the product. So maybe they're, you know, an online video service and they want to understand why people are either using or not using the whiteboard inside the product. And they're collecting a lot of that product analytics in a big way so that they can go through that. And they're doing it in a constant manner. This first party type tracking within applications is growing rapidly by customers. >> So, let's talk about who wins in that. So, obviously the Cloud guys, AWS, Google and Azure. I want to come back and unpack that a little bit. Databricks and Snowflake, we reported on our last breaking analysis, it kind of on a collision course. You know, a couple years ago we were thinking, okay, AWS, Snowflake and Databricks, like perfect sandwich. And then of course they started to become more competitive. My sense is they still, you know, compliment each other in the field, right? But, you know, publicly, they've got bigger aspirations, they get big TAMs that they're going after. But it's interesting, the data shows that-- So, Snowflake was off the charts in terms of spending momentum and our EPR surveys. Our partner down in New York, they kind of came into line. They're both growing in terms of market presence. Databricks couldn't get to IPO. So, we don't have as much, you know, visibility on their financials. You know, Snowflake obviously highly transparent cause they're a public company. And then you got AWS, Google and Azure. And it seems like AWS appears to be more partner friendly. Microsoft, you know, depends on what market you're in. And Google wants to sell BigQuery. >> Yeah. >> So, what are you seeing in the public Cloud from a data platform perspective? >> Yeah. I think that was pretty astute in what you were talking about there, because I think of the three, Google is definitely I think a little bit behind in how they go to market with their partners. Azure's done a fantastic job of partnering with these companies to understand and even though they may have Synapse as their go-to and where they want people to go to do AI and ML. What they're looking at is, Hey, we're going to also be friendly with Snowflake. We're also going to be friendly with a Databricks. And I think that, Amazon has always been there because that's where the market has been for these developers. So, many, like Databricks' and the Snowflake's have gone there first because, you know, Databricks' case, they built out on top of S3 first. And going and using somebody's object layer other than AWS, was not as simple as you would think it would be. Moving between those. >> So, one of the financial meetups I said meetup, but the... It was either the CEO or the CFO. It was either Slootman or Scarpelli talking at, I don't know, Merrill Lynch or one of the other financial conferences said, I think it was probably their Q3 call. Snowflake said 80% of our business goes through Amazon. And he said to this audience, the next day we got a call from Microsoft. Hey, we got to do more. And, we know just from reading the financial statements that Snowflake is getting concessions from Amazon, they're buying in volume, they're renegotiating their contracts. Amazon gets it. You know, lower the price, people buy more. Long term, we're all going to make more money. Microsoft obviously wants to get into that game with Snowflake. They understand the momentum. They said Google, not so much. And I've had customers tell me that they wanted to use Google's AI with Snowflake, but they can't, they got to go to to BigQuery. So, honestly, I haven't like vetted that so. But, I think it's true. But nonetheless, it seems like Google's a little less friendly with the data platform providers. What do you think? >> Yeah, I would say so. I think this is a place that Google looks and wants to own. Is that now, are they doing the right things long term? I mean again, you know, you look at Google Analytics being you know, basically outlawed in five countries in the EU because of GDPR concerns, and compliance and governance of data. And I think people are looking at Google and BigQuery in general and saying, is it the best place for me to go? Is it going to be in the right places where I need it? Still, it's still one of the largest used databases out there just because it underpins a number of the Google services. So you almost get, like you were saying, forced into BigQuery sometimes, if you want to use the tech on top. >> You do strategy. >> Yeah. >> Right? You do strategy, you do messaging. Is it the right call by Google? I mean, it's not a-- I criticize Google sometimes. But, I'm not sure it's the wrong call to say, Hey, this is our ace in the hole. >> Yeah. >> We got to get people into BigQuery. Cause, first of all, BigQuery is a solid product. I mean it's Cloud native and it's, you know, by all, it gets high marks. So, why give the competition an advantage? Let's try to force people essentially into what is we think a great product and it is a great product. The flip side of that is, they're giving up some potential partner TAM and not treating the ecosystem as well as one of their major competitors. What do you do if you're in that position? >> Yeah, I think that that's a fantastic question. And the question I pose back to the companies I've worked with and worked for is, are you really looking to have vendor lock-in as your key differentiator to your service? And I think when you start to look at these companies that are moving away from BigQuery, moving to even, Databricks on top of GCS in Google, they're looking to say, okay, I can go there if I have to evacuate from GCP and go to another Cloud, I can stay on Databricks as a platform, for instance. So I think it's, people are looking at what platform as a service, database as a service they go and use. Because from a strategic perspective, they don't want that vendor locking. >> That's where Supercloud becomes interesting, right? Because, if I can run on Snowflake or Databricks, you know, across Clouds. Even Oracle, you know, they're getting into business with Microsoft. Let's talk about some of the Cloud players. So, the big three have reported. >> Right. >> We saw AWSs Cloud growth decelerated down to 20%, which is I think the lowest growth rate since they started to disclose public numbers. And they said they exited, sorry, they said January they grew at 15%. >> Yeah. >> Year on year. Now, they had some pretty tough compares. But nonetheless, 15%, wow. Azure, kind of mid thirties, and then Google, we had kind of low thirties. But, well behind in terms of size. And Google's losing probably almost $3 billion annually. But, that's not necessarily a bad thing by advocating and investing. What's happening with the Cloud? Is AWS just running into the law, large numbers? Do you think we can actually see a re-acceleration like we have in the past with AWS Cloud? Azure, we predicted is going to be 75% of AWS IAS revenues. You know, we try to estimate IAS. >> Yeah. >> Even though they don't share that with us. That's a huge milestone. You'd think-- There's some people who have, I think, Bob Evans predicted a while ago that Microsoft would surpass AWS in terms of size. You know, what do you think? >> Yeah, I think that Azure's going to keep to-- Keep growing at a pretty good clip. I think that for Azure, they still have really great account control, even though people like to hate Microsoft. The Microsoft sellers that are out there making those companies successful day after day have really done a good job of being in those accounts and helping people. I was recently over in the UK. And the UK market between AWS and Azure is pretty amazing, how much Azure there is. And it's growing within Europe in general. In the states, it's, you know, I think it's growing well. I think it's still growing, probably not as fast as it is outside the U.S. But, you go down to someplace like Australia, it's also Azure. You hear about Azure all the time. >> Why? Is that just because of the Microsoft's software state? It's just so convenient. >> I think it has to do with, you know, and you can go with the reasoning they don't break out, you know, Office 365 and all of that out of their numbers is because they have-- They're in all of these accounts because the office suite is so pervasive in there. So, they always have reasons to go back in and, oh by the way, you're on these old SQL licenses. Let us move you up here and we'll be able to-- We'll support you on the old version, you know, with security and all of these things. And be able to move you forward. So, they have a lot of, I guess you could say, levers to stay in those accounts and be interesting. At least as part of the Cloud estate. I think Amazon, you know, is hitting, you know, the large number. Laws of large numbers. But I think that they're also going through, and I think this was seen in the layoffs that they were making, that they're looking to understand and have profitability in more of those services that they have. You know, over 350 odd services that they have. And you know, as somebody who went there and helped to start yet a new one, while I was there. And finally, it went to beta back in September, you start to look at the fact that, that number of services, people, their own sellers don't even know all of their services. It's impossible to comprehend and sell that many things. So, I think what they're going through is really looking to rationalize a lot of what they're doing from a services perspective going forward. They're looking to focus on more profitable services and bringing those in. Because right now it's built like a layer cake where you have, you know, S3 EBS and EC2 on the bottom of the layer cake. And then maybe you have, you're using IAM, the authorization and authentication in there and you have all these different services. And then they call it EMR on top. And so, EMR has to pay for that entire layer cake just to go and compete against somebody like Mongo or something like that. So, you start to unwind the costs of that. Whereas Azure, went and they build basically ground up services for the most part. And Google kind of falls somewhere in between in how they build their-- They're a sort of layer cake type effect, but not as many layers I guess you could say. >> I feel like, you know, Amazon's trying to be a platform for the ecosystem. Yes, they have their own products and they're going to sell. And that's going to drive their profitability cause they don't have to split the pie. But, they're taking a piece of-- They're spinning the meter, as Ziyas Caravalo likes to say on every time Snowflake or Databricks or Mongo or Atlas is, you know, running on their system. They take a piece of the action. Now, Microsoft does that as well. But, you look at Microsoft and security, head-to-head competitors, for example, with a CrowdStrike or an Okta in identity. Whereas, it seems like at least for now, AWS is a more friendly place for the ecosystem. At the same time, you do a lot of business in Microsoft. >> Yeah. And I think that a lot of companies have always feared that Amazon would just throw, you know, bodies at it. And I think that people have come to the realization that a two pizza team, as Amazon would call it, is eight people. I think that's, you know, two slices per person. I'm a little bit fat, so I don't know if that's enough. But, you start to look at it and go, okay, if they're going to start out with eight engineers, if I'm a startup and they're part of my ecosystem, do I really fear them or should I really embrace them and try to partner closer with them? And I think the smart people and the smart companies are partnering with them because they're realizing, Amazon, unless they can see it to, you know, a hundred million, $500 million market, they're not going to throw eight to 16 people at a problem. I think when, you know, you could say, you could look at the elastic with OpenSearch and what they did there. And the licensing terms and the battle they went through. But they knew that Elastic had a huge market. Also, you had a number of ecosystem companies building on top of now OpenSearch, that are now domain on top of Amazon as well. So, I think Amazon's being pretty strategic in how they're doing it. I think some of the-- It'll be interesting. I think this year is a payout year for the cuts that they're making to some of the services internally to kind of, you know, how do we take the fat off some of those services that-- You know, you look at Alexa. I don't know how much revenue Alexa really generates for them. But it's a means to an end for a number of different other services and partners. >> What do you make of this ChatGPT? I mean, Microsoft obviously is playing that card. You want to, you want ChatGPT in the Cloud, come to Azure. Seems like AWS has to respond. And we know Google is, you know, sharpening its knives to come up with its response. >> Yeah, I mean Google just went and talked about Bard for the first time this week and they're in private preview or I guess they call it beta, but. Right at the moment to select, select AI users, which I have no idea what that means. But that's a very interesting way that they're marketing it out there. But, I think that Amazon will have to respond. I think they'll be more measured than say, what Google's doing with Bard and just throwing it out there to, hey, we're going into beta now. I think they'll look at it and see where do we go and how do we actually integrate this in? Because they do have a lot of components of AI and ML underneath the hood that other services use. And I think that, you know, they've learned from that. And I think that they've already done a good job. Especially for media and entertainment when you start to look at some of the ways that they use it for helping do graphics and helping to do drones. I think part of their buy of iRobot was the fact that iRobot was a big user of RoboMaker, which is using different models to train those robots to go around objects and things like that, so. >> Quick touch on Kubernetes, the whole DevOps World we just covered. The Cloud Native Foundation Security, CNCF. The security conference up in Seattle last week. First time they spun that out kind of like reinforced, you know, AWS spins out, reinforced from reinvent. Amsterdam's coming up soon, the CubeCon. What should we expect? What's hot in Cubeland? >> Yeah, I think, you know, Kubes, you're going to be looking at how OpenShift keeps growing and I think to that respect you get to see the momentum with people like Red Hat. You see others coming up and realizing how OpenShift has gone to market as being, like you were saying, partnering with those Clouds and really making it simple. I think the simplicity and the manageability of Kubernetes is going to be at the forefront. I think a lot of the investment is still going into, how do I bring observability and DevOps and AIOps and MLOps all together. And I think that's going to be a big place where people are going to be looking to see what comes out of CubeCon in Amsterdam. I think it's that manageability ease of use. >> Well Rob, I look forward to working with you on behalf of the whole Cube team. We're going to do more of these and go out to some shows extract the signal from the noise. Really appreciate you coming into our studio. >> Well, thank you for having me on. Really appreciate it. >> You're really welcome. All right, keep it right there, or thanks for watching. This is Dave Vellante for the Cube. And we'll see you next time. (light music)

>> Presenter: theCUBE presents Ignite '22, brought to you by Palo Alto Networks. >> Hey guys and girls. Welcome back to theCube's live coverage at Palo Alto Ignite '22. We're live at the MGM Grand Hotel in beautiful Las Vegas. Lisa Martin here with Dave Vellante. This is day one of our coverage. We've been talking with execs from Palo Alto, Partners, but one of our most exciting things is talking with Founders day. We get to do that next. >> The thing is, it's like I wrote this weekend in my breaking analysis. Understanding the problem in cybersecurity is really easy, but figuring out how to fix it ain't so much. >> It definitely isn't. >> So I'm excited to have Nir here. >> Very excited. Nir Zuk joins us, the founder and CTO of Palo Alto Networks. Welcome, Nir. Great to have you on the program. >> Thank you. >> So Palo Alto Networks, you founded it back in 2005. It's hard to believe that's been 18 years, almost. You did something different, which I want to get into. But tell us, what was it back then? Why did you found this company? >> I thought the world needed another cybersecurity company. I thought it's because there were so many cybersecurity vendors in the world, and just didn't make any sense. This industry has evolved in a very weird way, where every time there was a new challenge, rather than existing vendors dealing with a challenge, you had new vendors dealing with it, and I thought I could put a stop to it, and I think I did. >> You did something differently back in 2005, looking at where you are now, the leader, what was different in your mind back then? >> Yeah. When you found a new company, you have really two good options. There's also a bad option, but we'll skip that. You can either disrupt an existing market, or you can create a new market. So first, I decided to disrupt an existing market, go into an existing market first, network security, then cyber security, and change it. Change the way it works. And like I said, the challenges that every problem had a new vendor, and nobody just stepped back and said, "I think I can solve it with the platform." Meaning, I think I can spend some time not solving a specific problem, but building a platform that then can be used to solve many different problems. And that's what I've done, and that's what Palo Alto Networks has done, and that's where we are today. >> So you look back, you call it now, I think you call it a next gen firewall, but nothing in 2005, can it be next gen? Do you know the Silicon Valley Show? Do you know the show Silicon Valley? >> Oh! Yeah. >> Yeah, of course. >> You got to have a box. But it was a different kind of box- >> Actually. >> Explain that. >> Actually, it's exactly the same thing. You got to have a box. So I actually wanted to call it a necessary evil. Marketing wouldn't go for that. >> No. >> And the reason I wanted to call it a necessary evil, because one of the things that we've done in order to platform our cyber security, again, first network security now, also cloud security, and security operations, is to turn it into a SaaS delivered industry. Today every cyber security professional knows that, when they buy cyber security, they buy usually a SaaS delivered service. Back then, people thought I was crazy to think that customers are going to send their data to their vendor in order to process, and they wanted everything on premise and so on, but I said, "No, customers are going to send information to us for processing, because we have much more processing power than they have." And we needed something in the infrastructure to send us the information. So that's why I wanted to call it the necessary evil. We ended up calling it next generation firewall, which was probably a better term. >> Well, even Veritas. Remember Veritas? They had the no hardware agenda. Even they have a box. So it is like you say, you got to have it. >> It's necessary. >> Okay. You did this, you started this on your own cloud, kind of like Salesforce, ServiceNow. >> Correct. >> Similar now- >> Build your own data centers. >> Build your own data center. Okay, I call it a cloud, but no. >> No, it's the same. There's no cloud, it's just someone else's computer. >> According to Larry Ellison, he was actually probably right about that. But over time, you've had this closer partnership with the public clouds. >> Correct. >> What does that bring you and your customers, and how hard was that to navigate? >> It wasn't that hard for us, because we didn't have that many services. Usually it's harder. Of course, we didn't do a lift and shift, which is their own thing to do with the cloud. We rebuild things for the cloud, and the benefits, of course, are time to market, scale, agility, and in some cases also, cost. >> Yeah, some cases. >> In some cases. >> So you have a sort of a hybrid model today. You still run your own data centers, do you not? >> Very few. >> Really? >> There are very, very few things that we have to do on hardware, like simulating malware and things that cannot be done in a virtual machine, which is pretty much the only option you have in the cloud. They provide bare metal, but doesn't serve our needs. I think that we don't view cloud, and your viewers should not be viewing cloud, as a place where they're going to save money. It's a place where they're going to make money. >> I like that. >> You make much more money, because you're more agile. >> And that's why this conversation is all about, your cost of goods sold they're going to be so high, you're going to have to come back to your own data centers. That's not on your mind right now. What's on your mind is advancing the unit, right? >> Look, my own data center would limit me in scale, would limit my agility. If you want to build something new, you don't have all the PaaS services, the platform as a service, services like database, and AI, and so on. I have to build them myself. It takes time. So yeah, it's going to be cheaper, but I'm not going to be delivering the same thing. So my revenues will be much lower. >> Less top line. What can humans do better than machines? You were talking about your keynote... I'm just going to chat a little bit. You were talking about your keynote. Basically, if you guys didn't see the keynote, that AI is going to run every soc within five years, that was a great prediction that you made. >> Correct. >> And they're going to do things that you can't do today, and then in the future, they're going to do things that you can't... Better than you can do. >> And you just have to be comfortable with that. >> So what do you think humans can do today and in the future better than machines? >> Look, humans can always do better than machines. The human mind can do things that machines cannot do. We are conscious, I don't think machines will be conscious. And you can do things... My point was not that machines can do things that humans cannot do. They can just do it better. The things that humans do today, machines can do better, once machines do that, humans will be free to do things that they don't do today, that machines cannot do. >> Like what? >> Like finding the most difficult, most covert attacks, dealing with the most difficult incidents, things that machines just can't do. Just that today, humans are consumed by finding attacks that machines can find, by dealing with incidents that machines can deal with. It's a waste of time. We leave it to the machines and go and focus on the most difficult problems, and then have the machines learn from you, so that next time or a hundred or a thousand times from now, they can do it themselves, and you focus on the even more difficult. >> Yeah, just like after 9/11, they said that we lack the creativity. That's what humans have, that machines don't, at least today. >> Machines don't. Yeah, look, every airplane has two pilots, even though airplanes have been flying themselves for 30 years now, why do you have two pilots, to do the things that machines cannot do? Like land on the Hudson, right? You always need humans to do the things that machines cannot do. But to leave the things that machines can do to the machines, they'll do it better. >> And autonomous vehicles need breaks. (indistinct) >> In your customer conversations, are customers really grappling with that, are they going, "Yeah, you're right?" >> It depends. It's hard for customers to let go of old habits. First, the habit of buying a hundred different solutions from a hundred different vendors, and you know what? Why would I trust one vendor to do everything, put all my eggs in the same basket? They have all kind of slogans as to why not to do that, even though it's been proven again and again that, doing everything in one system with one brain, versus a hundred systems with a hundred brains, work much better. So that's one thing. The second thing is, we always have the same issue that we've had, I think, since the industrial revolution, of what machines are going to take away my job. No, they're just going to make your job better. So I think that some of our customers are also grappling with that, like, "What do I do if the machines take over?" And of course, like we've said, the machines aren't taking over. They're going to do the benign work, you're going to do the interesting work. You should embrace it. >> When I think about your history as a technology pro, from Check Point, a couple of startups, one of the things that always frustrated you, is when when a larger company bought you out, you ended up getting sucked into the bureaucratic vortex. How do you avoid that at Palo Alto Networks? >> So first, you mean when we acquire company? >> Yes. >> The first thing is that, when we acquire companies, we always acquire for integration. Meaning, we don't just buy something and then leave it on the side, and try to sell it here and there. We integrate it into the core of our products. So that's very important, so that the technology lives, thrives and continues to grow as part of our bigger platform. And I think that the second thing that is very important, from past experience what we've learned, is to put the people that we acquire in key positions. Meaning, you don't buy a company and then put the leader of that company five levels below the CEO. You always put them in very senior positions. Almost always, we have the leaders of the companies that we acquire, be two levels below the CEO, so very senior in the company, so they can influence and make changes. >> So two questions related to that. One is, as you grow your team, can you be both integrated? And second part of the question, can you be both integrated and best of breed? Second part of the question is, do you even have to be? >> So I'll answer it in the third way, which is, I don't think you can be best of breed without being integrated in cybersecurity. And the reason is, again, this split brain that I've mentioned twice. When you have different products do a part of cybersecurity and they don't talk to each other, and they don't share a single brain, you always compromise. You start looking for things the wrong way. I can be a little bit technical here, but please. Take the example of, traditionally you would buy an IDS/IPS, separately from your filtering, separately from DNS security. One of the most important things we do in network security is to find combining control connections. Combining control connections where the adversaries controlling something behind your firewall and is now going around your network, is usually the key heel of the attack. That's why attacks like ransomware, that don't have a commanding control connection, are so difficult to deal with, by the way. So commanding control connections are a key seal of the attacks, and there are three different technologies that deal with it. Neural filtering for neural based commanding control, DNS security for DNS based commanding control, and IDS/IPS for general commanding control. If those are three different products, they'll be doing the wrong things. The oral filter will try to find things that it's not really good at, that the IPS really need to find, and the DN... It doesn't work. It works much better when it's one product doing everything. So I think the choice is not between best of breed and integrated. I think the only choice is integrated, because that's the only way to be best of breed. >> And behind that technology is some kind of realtime data store, I'll call it data lake, database. >> Yeah. >> Whatever. >> It's all driven by the same data. All the URLs, all the domain graph. Everything goes to one big data lake. We collect about... I think we collect about, a few petabytes per day. I don't write the exact number of data. It's all going to the same data lake, and all the intelligence is driven by that. >> So you mentioned in a cheeky comment about, why you founded the company, there weren't enough cybersecurity companies. >> Yeah. >> Clearly the term expansion strategy that Palo Alto Networks has done has been very successful. You've been, as you talked about, very focused on integration, not just from the technology perspective, but from the people perspective as well. >> Correct. >> So why are there still so many cybersecurity companies, and what are you thinking Palo Alto Networks can do to change that? >> So first, I think that there are a lot of cybersecurity companies out there, because there's a lot of money going into cybersecurity. If you look at the number of companies that have been really successful, it's a very small percentage of those cybersecurity companies. And also look, we're not going to be responsible for all the innovation in cybersecurity. We need other people to innovate. It's also... Look, always the question is, "Do you buy something or do you build it yourself?" Now we think we're the smartest people in the world. Of course, we can build everything, but it's not always true that we can build everything. Know that we're the smartest people in the world, for sure. You see, when you are a startup, you live and die by the thing that you build. Meaning if it's good, it works. If it's not good, you die. You run out of money, you shut down, and you just lost four years of your life to this, at least. >> At least. >> When you're a large company, yeah, I can go and find a hundred engineers and hire them. And especially nowadays, it becomes easier, as it became easier, and give them money, and have them go and build the same thing that the startup is building, but they're part of a bigger company, and they'll have more coffee breaks, and they'll be less incentive to go and do that, because the company will survive with or without them. So that's why startups can do things much better, sometimes than larger companies. We can do things better than startups, when it comes to being data driven because we have the data, and nobody can compete against the amount of data that we have. So we have a good combination of finding the right startups that have already built something, already proven that it works with some customers, and of course, building a lot of things internally that we cannot do outside. >> I heard you say in one of the, I dunno, dozens of videos I've listened to you talked to. The industry doesn't need or doesn't want another IoT stovepipe. Okay, I agree. So you got on-prem, AWS, Azure, Google, maybe Alibaba, IoT is going to be all over the place. So can you build, I call it the security super cloud, in other words, a consistent experience with the same policies and edicts across all my estates, irrespective of physical location? Is that technically feasible? Is it what you are trying to do? >> Certainly, what we're trying to do with Prisma Cloud, with our cloud security product, it works across all the clouds that you mentioned, and Oracle as well. It's almost entirely possible. >> Almost. >> Almost. Well, the things that... What you do is you normalize the language that the different cloud scale providers use, into one language. This cloud calls it a S3, and so, AWS calls it S3, and (indistinct) calls it GCS, and so on. So you normalize their terminology, and then build policy using a common terminology that your customers have to get used to. Of course, there are things that are different between the different cloud providers that cannot be normalized, and there, it has to be cloud specific. >> In that instance. So is that, in part, your strategy, is to actually build that? >> Of course. >> And does that necessitate running on all the major clouds? >> Of course. It's not just part of our strategy, it's a major part of our strategy. >> Compulsory. >> Look, as a standalone vendor that is not a cloud provider, we have two advantages. The first one is we're security product, security focused. So we can do much better than them when it comes to security. If you are a AWS, GCP, Azure, and so on, you're not going to put your best people on security, you're going to put them on the core business that you have. So we can do much better. Hey, that's interesting. >> Well, that's not how they talk. >> I don't care how they talk. >> Now that's interesting. >> When something is 4% of your business, you're not going to put it... You're not going to put your best people there. It's just, why would you? You put your best people on 96%. >> That's not driving their revenue. >> Look, it's simple. It's not what we- >> With all due respect. With all due respect. >> So I think we do security much better than them, and they become the good enough, and we become the premium. But certainly, the second thing that give us an advantage and the right to be a standalone security provider, is that we're multicloud, private cloud and all the major cloud providers. >> But they also have a different role. I mean, your role is not the security, the Nitro card or the Graviton chip, or is it? >> They are responsible for securing up to the operating system. We secure everything. >> They do a pretty good job of that. >> No, they do, certainly they have to. If they get bridged at that level, it's not just that one customer is going to suffer, the entire customer base. They have to spend a lot of time and money on it, and frankly, that's where they put their best security people. Securing the infrastructure, not building some cloud security feature. >> Absolutely. >> So Palo Alto Networks is, as we wrap here, on track to nearly double its revenues to nearly seven billion in FY '23, just compared to 2020, you were quoted in the press by saying, "We will be the first $100 billion cyber company." What is next for Palo Alto to achieve that? >> Yeah, so it was Nikesh, our CEO and chairman, that was quoted saying that, "We will double to a hundred billion." I don't think he gave it a timeframe, but what it takes is to double the sales, right? We're at 50 billion market cap right now, so we need to double sales. But in reality, you mentioned that we're growing the turn by doing more and more cybersecurity functions, and taking away pieces. Still, we have a relatively small, even though we're the largest cybersecurity vendor in the world, we have a very low market share that shows you how fragmented the market is. I would also like to point out something that is less known. Part of what we do with AI, is really take the part of the cybersecurity industry, which are service oriented, and that's about 50% of the cybersecurity industry services, and turn it into products. I mean, not all of it. But a good portion of what's provided today by people, and tens of billions of dollars are spent on that, can be done with products. And being one of the very, very few vendors that do that, I think we have a huge opportunity at turning those tens of billions of dollars in human services to AI. >> It's always been a good business taking human labor and translating into R and D, vendor R and D. >> Especially- >> It never fails if you do it well. >> Especially in difficult times, difficult economical times like we are probably experiencing right now around the world. We, not we, but we the world. >> Right, right. Well, congratulations. Coming up on the 18th anniversary. Tremendous amount of success. >> Thank you. >> Great vision, clear vision, STEM expansion strategy, really well underway. We are definitely going to continue to keep our eyes. >> Big company, a hundred billion, that's market capital, so that's a big company. You said you didn't want to work for a big company unless you founded it, is that... >> Unless it acts like a small company. >> There's the caveat. We'll keep our eye on that. >> Thank you very much. >> It's such a pleasure having you on. >> Thank you. >> Same here, thank you. >> All right, for our guests and for Dave Vellante, I'm Lisa Martin. You're watching theCUBE, the leader in live emerging and enterprise tech coverage. (upbeat music)

>>Mhm. Yes. Hello. Welcome back to the cubes coverage of dr khan 2021 virtual. I'm john for your host of the cube. We're messing my fair principal technologist at AWS amazon Web services messman. Thank you for coming on the cube, appreciate it. Um >>Thank you. Thank you for having me. >>Great to see you love this amazon integration with doctor want to get into that in a second. Um Been great to see the amazon cloud native integration working well. E. C. S very popular. Every interview I've done at reinvent uh every year it gets better and better more adoption every year. Um Tell us what's going on with amazon E. C. S because you have Pcs anywhere and now that's being available. >>Yeah that's fine, that's correct, join and uh yeah so customers has been appreciating the value and the simplicity of VCS for many years now. I mean we we launched GCS back in 2014 and we have seen great adoption of the product and customers has always been appreciating. Uh the fact that it was easy to operate and easy to use. Uh This is a journey with the CS anywhere that started a few years ago actually. And we started this journey uh listening to customers that had particular requirements. Um I'd like to talk about, you know, the the law of the land and the law um uh of the physic where customers wanted to go all in into uh into the cloud, but they did have this exception that they need to uh deal with with the application that could not move to the cloud. So as I said, this journey started three years ago when we launched outpost. Um and outpost is our managed infrastructure that customers can deploy in their own data centers. And we supported Pcs on day one on outpost. Um having that said, there are lots of customers that came to us and said we love outputs but there are certain applications and certain requirements, uh such as compliance or the fact simply that we have like assets that we need to reuse in our data center uh that we want to use and before we move into into the cloud. So they were asking us, we love the simplicity of Vcs but we have to use gears that we have in our data center. That is when we started thinking about Pcs anywhere. So basically the idea of VCS anywhere is that you can use e c s E C as part of that, you know, and love um uh appreciated the simplicity of using Pcs but using your customer managed infrastructure as the data plane, basically what you could do is you can define your application within the Ec. S country plane and deploy those applications on customer own um infrastructure. What that means from a very practical perspective is that you can deploy this application on your managed infrastructure ranging from uh raspberry pis this is the demo that we show the invent when we pronounce um e c s anywhere all the way up to bare metal server, we don't really care about the infrastructure underneath. As long as it supported, the OS is supported. Um we're fine with that. >>Okay, so let's take this to the next level and actually the big theme at dr Connors developer experience, you know, that's kind of want to talk about that and obviously developer productivity and innovation have to go hand in hand. You don't want to stunt the innovation equation, which is cloud, native and scale. Right. So how does the developer experience improve with amazon ECs and anywhere now that I'm on, on premises or in the cloud? Can you take me through? What's the improvements around pcs and the developer? >>Yeah I would argue that the the what you see as anywhere solved is more for operational aspect and the requirements that more that are more akin to the operation team that that they need to meet. Uh We're working very hard to um to improve the developing experience on top of the CS beyond what we're doing with the CS anywhere. So um I'd like to step back a little bit and maybe tell a little bit of a story of why we're working on those things. So um the customer as I said before, continue to appreciate the simplicity and the easier views of E. C. S. However what we learn um over the years is that as we added more features to E. C. S, we ended up uh leveraging more easy. Um AWS services um example uh would be a load balancer integration or secret manager or Fc. Or um other things like service discovery that uses underneath other AWS products like um clubman for around 53. And what happened is that the end user experience, the developer experience became a little bit more complicated because now customers opportunity easy of use of these fully managed services. However they were responsible for time and watering all uh together in the application definition. So what we're working on to simplify this experience is we're working on tools that kind of abstract these um this verbal city that you get with pcs. Um uh An example is a confirmation template that a developer we need to use uh to deploy an application leveraging all of these features. Could then could end up being uh many hundreds of transformation lines um in the in the in the definition of the service. So we're working on new tools and new capabilities to make this experience better. Uh Some of them are C d k uh the copilot cli, dws, copilot cli those are all instruments and technologies and tools that we're building to abstract that um uh verbosity that I was alluding to and this is where actually also the doctor composed integration with the CS falls in. >>Yeah, I'm just gonna ask you that the doctor piece because actually it's dr khan all the developers love containers, they love what they do. Um This is a native, you know, mindset of shifting left with security. How is the relationship with the Docker container ecosystem going with you guys? Can you take him in to explain for the folks here watching this event and participating in the community, explain the relationship with Docker container specifically. >>Yeah, absolutely. Uh so basically we started working with dR many, many years ago, um uh Pcs was based on on DR technology when we launch it. Uh and it's still using uh DR technology and last year we started to collaborate with dR more closely um when DR releases the doctor composed specification um as an open source projects. So basically doctor is trying to use the doctor composed specification to create uh infrastructure product gnostic, uh way to deploy Docker application um uh using those specification in multiple infrastructure as part of these journey, we work with dr to support pcs as a back end um for um for the specification, basically what this means from a very practical perspective, is that you can take a doctor composed an existing doctor composed file. Um and doctor says that there are 650,000 doctor composed files spread across the top and all um uh lose control uh system um over the world. And basically you can take those doctor composed file and uh composed up and deploy transparently um into E. C. S Target on AWS. So basically if we go back to what I was alluding to before, the fact that the developer would need to author many 100 line of confirmation template to be able to take their application and deploy it into the cloud. What they need to do now is um offering a new file, a um a file uh with a very clear and easy to use dr composed syntax composed up and deploy automatically on AWS. Um and using Pcs Fargate um and many other AWS services in the back end. >>And what's the expectation in your mind as you guys look at the container service to anywhere model the on premise and without post, what does he what's the vision? Because that's again, another question mark for me, it's like, okay, I get it totally makes sense. Um, but containers are showing the mainstream enterprises, not the hyper skills. You guys always been kind of the forward thinkers, but you know, main street enterprise, I call it. They're picking up adoption of containers in a massive way. They're looking at cloud native specifically as the place for modern application development period. That's happening. What's the story? Say it again? Because I want to make sure I get this right e C s anywhere if I want to get on premises hybrid, What's it mean for me? >>Uh, this goes back to what I was saying at the beginning. So there are there are there when we have been discussing here are mostly to or token of things. Right. So the fact that we enable these big enterprises to meet their requirements and meet their um their um checkboxes sometimes to be able to deploy outside of AWS when there is a need to do that. This could be for edge use cases or for um using years that exist in the data center. So this is where e c s anywhere is basically trying, this is what uh pcs anywhere is trying to address. There is another orthogonal discussion which is developer experience, uh and that development experience is being addressed by these additional tools. Um what I like to say is that uh the confirmation is becoming a little bit like assembler in a sense, right? It's becoming very low level, super powerful, but very low level and we want to abstract and bring the experience to the next level and make it simple for developers to leverage the simplicity of some of these tools including Docker compose um and and and being able to deploy into the cloud um and getting all the benefits of the cloud scalability, electricity and security. >>I love the assembler analogy because you think about it. A lot of the innovation has been kind of like low level foundational and if you start to see all the open source activity and the customers, the tooling does matter. And I think that's where the ease of use comes in. So the simplicity totally makes sense. Um can you give an example of some simplicity piece? Because I think, you know, you guys, you know, look at looking at ec. S as the cornerstone for simplicity. I get that. Can you give an example to walk us through a day in the life of of an example >>uh in an example of simplicity? Yeah, supposedly in action. Yeah. Well, one of the examples that I usually do and there is this uh, notion of being served less and I think that there is a little bit of a, of an obsession around surveillance and trying to talk about surveillance for so many things. When I talk about the C. S, I like to use another moniker that is version less. So to me, simplicity also means that I do not have to um update my service. Right? So the way E C. S works is that engineering in the service team keeps producing and keeps delivering new features for PCS overnight for customers to wake up in the morning and consuming those features without having to deal with upgrades and updates. I think that this is a very key, um, very key example of simplicity when it comes to e C s that is very hard to find um in other, um, solutions whether there are on prime or in the cloud. >>That's a great example in one of the big complaints I hear just anecdotally around the industry is, you know, the speed of the minds of business, want the apps to move faster and the iteration with some craft obviously with security and making sure things buttoned up, but things get pulled back. It's almost slowed down because the speed of the innovation is happening faster than the compliance of some sort of old governance model or code reviews. I want to approve everything. So there's a balance between making sure what's approved, whether security or some pipeline procedures and what not. >>So that I could have. I cannot agree more with you. Yeah, no, it's absolutely true because I think that we see these very interesting um, uh, economy, I would say between startups moving super fast and enterprises try to move fast but forced to move at their own speed. So when we when we deliver services based on, for example, open source software uh, that customers need to um, look after in terms of upgrade to latest release. What we usually see is start up asking us can you move faster? There is a new version of that software, can you enable us to deploy that version? And then on the other hand of the spectrum, there are these big enterprises trying to move faster but not so much that are asking us can use lower. Can you slow down a little bit? Right, because I cannot keep that pigs. So it's a very it's a very interesting um, um, a very interesting time to be alive. >>You know, one of the, one of the things that pop up into these conversations when you talk, when I talk to VP of engineering of companies and then enterprises that the operational efficiency, you got developer productivity and you've got innovation right, you've got the three kind of things going on there knobs and they all have to turn up. People want more efficiency of the operations, they want more developed productivity and more innovation. What's interesting is you start seeing, okay, it's not that easy. There's also a team formation and I know Andy Jassy kinda referred to this in his keynote at Reinvent last year around thinking differently around your organizational but you know, that could be applied to technologists too. So I'd love to get your thoughts while you're here. I know you blog about this and you tweet about this but this is kind of like okay if these things are all going to be knobs, we turned up innovation efficiency, operationally and develop productivity. What's the makeup of the team? Because some are saying, you have an SRE embedded, you've got the platform engineering, you've got version lists, you got survival is all these things are going on all goodness. But does that mean that the teams have to change? What's your thoughts on that you want to get your perspective? >>Yeah, no, absolutely. I think that there was a joke going around that um as soon as you see a job like VP of devoPS, I mean that is not going to work, right? Because these things are needs to be like embedded into each team, right? There shouldn't be a DEVOPS team or anything, it would be just a way of working. And I totally agree with you that these knobs needs to go insane, right? And you cannot just push too hard on innovation which are not having um other folks um to uh to be able to, you know, keep that pace um with you. And we're trying to health customers with multiple uh tools and services to try to um have not only developers and making developer experience uh better but also helping people that are building these underneath platforms. Like for example, prod on AWS protein is a good example of this, where we're focusing on helping these um teams that are trying to build platforms because they are not looking themselves as being a giant or very fast. But they're they're they're measured on being secure, being compliant and being, you know, within a guardrail uh that an enterprise um regulated enterprise needs to have. So we need to have all of these people um both organizationally as well as with providing tools and technologies that have them in their specific areas um to succeed. >>Yeah. And what's interesting about all this is that you know I think we're also having conversations and and again you're starting to see things more clearly here at dr khan we saw some things that coop con which the joke there was not joke but the observation was it's less about kubernetes which is now becoming boring, lee reliable to more about cloud native applications under the covers with program ability. So as all this is going on there truly is a flip of the script. You can actually re engineer and re factor everything, not just re platform your applications in I. T. At once. Right now there's a window whether it's security or whatever. Now that the containers and and the doctor ecosystem and the container ecosystem and the The kubernetes, you've got KS and you got six far gay and all the stuff of goodness. Companies can actually do this right now. They can actually change everything. This is a unique time. This window might close are certainly changed if you're not on it now, it's the same argument of the folks who got caught in the pandemic and weren't in the cloud got flat footed. So you're seeing that example of if you weren't in the cloud up during the pandemic before the pandemic, you were probably losing during the pandemic, the ones that one where the already guys are in the cloud. Now the same thing is true with cloud native. You're not getting into it now, you're probably gonna be on the wrong side of history. What's your reaction to that? >>Yeah, No, I I I agree totally. I I like to think about this. I usually uh talk about this if I can stay back step back a little bit and I think that in this industry and I have gray areas and I have seen lots of things, I think that there has been too big Democratisation event in 90 that happened and occurred in the last 30 years. So the first one was from, you know from when um the PC technology has been introduced, distributed computing from the mainframe area and that was the first Democratisation step. Right? So everyone had access to um uh computers so they could do things if you if you fast forward to these days. Um uh what happened is that on top of that computer, whatever that became a server or whatever, there is a state a very complex stack of technologies uh that allow you to deployment and develop and deploy your application. Right. But that stack of technology and the complexity of that stack of technology is daunting in some way. Right? So it is in a bit access and democratic access to technology. So to me this is what cloud enabled, Right? So the next step of democratisation was the introduction of services that allow you to bypass that stack, which we call undifferentiated heavy lifting because you know, um you don't get paid for managing, I don't know any M. R. Server or whatever, you get paid for extracting values through application logic from that big stack. So I totally agree with you that we're in a unique position to enable everyone um with what we're building uh to innovate a lot faster and in a more secure way. >>Yeah. And what comes out, I totally agree. And I think that's a great historical view and I think let's bring this down to the present today and then bring this as the as the bridge to the future. If you're a developer you could. And by the way, no matter whether you're programming infrastructure or just writing software or even just calling a PS and rolling your own, composing your services, it's programmable and it's just all accessible. So I think that that's going to change the again back to the three knobs, developer productivity or just people productivity, operational efficiency, which is scale and then innovation, which is the business logic where I think machine learning starts to come in, right? So if you can get the container thing going, you start tapping into that control plane. It's not so much just the data control plane. It's like a software control plane. >>Yeah, no, absolutely. The fact that you can, I mean as I said, I have great hair. So I've seen a lot of things and back in the days, I mean the, I mean the whole notion of being able to call an api and get 10 servers for example or today, 10 containers. It would be like, you know, almost a joke, right? So we spent a lot of time racking and um, and doing so much manual stuff that was so ever prone because we usually talk about velocity and agility, but we, we rarely talk about, you know, the difficulties and the problems that doing things manually introduced in the process, the way that you can get wrong. >>You know, you know, it reminds me of this industry and I was like finally get off my lawn in the old days. I walk to school with no shoes on in the snow. We had to build our own colonel and our own graphics libraries and then now they have all these tools. It's like, you're just an old, you know, coder, but joking aside, you know that experience, you're bringing up appointments for the younger generation who have never loaded a Linux operating system before or had done anything like that level. It's not so much old versus young, it's more of a systems thinking, he said distributed computing. If you look at all the action, it's essentially distributed computing with new software paradigm and it's a system architecture. It's not so much software engineering, software developer, you know, this that it's just basically all engineering at this point, all software. >>It is, it is very much indeed. It's uh, it's whole software, there is no other um, there is no other way to call it. It's um, I mean we go back to talk about, you know, infrastructure as code and everything is now uh corridor software in in in a way. It's, yeah. >>This is great to have you on. Congratulations. A CS anywhere being available. It's great stuff. Um, and great to see you and, and great to have this conversation. Um, amazon web services obviously, uh, the world has has gone super cloud. Uh, now you have distributed computing with edge iot exploding beautifully, which means a lot of new opportunities. So thanks for coming on. >>Thank you very much for having me. It was a pleasure. Okay, cube >>Coverage of Dr Khan 2021 virtual. This is the Cube. I'm John for your host. Thanks for watching.

>> Live from San Jose, in the heart of Silicon Valley, it's theCUBE, covering DataWorks Summit 2018. Brought to you by HortonWorks. >> We are wrapping up Day One of coverage of Dataworks here in San Jose, California on theCUBE. I'm your host, Rebecca Knight, along with my co-host, James Kobielus. We have two guests for this last segment of the day. We have Sudhir Hasbe, who is the director of product management at Google and Ram Venkatesh, who is VP of Engineering at Hortonworks. Ram, Sudhir, thanks so much for coming on the show. >> Thank you very much. >> Thank you. >> So, I want to start out by asking you about a joint announcement that was made earlier this morning about using some Hortonworks technology deployed onto Google Cloud. Tell our viewers more. >> Sure, so basically what we announced was support for the Hortonworks DataPlatform and Hortonworks DataFlow, HDP and HDF, running on top of the Google Cloud Platform. So this includes deep integration with Google's cloud storage connector layer as well as it's a certified distribution of HDP to run on the Google Cloud Platform. >> I think the key thing is a lot of our customers have been telling us they like the familiar environment of Hortonworks distribution that they've been using on-premises and as they look at moving to cloud, like in GCP, Google Cloud, they want the similar, familiar environment. So, they want the choice to deploy on-premises or Google Cloud, but they want the familiarity of what they've already been using with Hortonworks products. So this announcement actually helps customers pick and choose like whether they want to run Hortonworks distribution on-premises, they want to do it in cloud, or they wat to build this hybrid solution where the data can reside on-premises, can move to cloud and build these common, hybrid architecture. So, that's what this does. >> So, HDP customers can store data in the Google Cloud. They can execute ephemeral workloads, analytic workloads, machine learning in the Google Cloud. And there's some tie-in between Hortonworks's real-time or low latency or streaming capabilities from HDF in the Google Cloud. So, could you describe, at a full sort of detail level, the degrees of technical integration between your two offerings here. >> You want to take that? >> Sure, I'll handle that. So, essentially, deep in the heart of HDP, there's the HDFS layer that includes Hadoop compatible file system which is a plug-able file system layer. So, what Google has done is they have provided an implementation of this API for the Google Cloud Storage Connector. So this is the GCS Connector. We've taken the connector and we've actually continued to refine it to work with our workloads and now Hortonworks has actually bundling, packaging, and making this connector be available as part of HDP. >> So bilateral data movement between them? Bilateral workload movement? >> No, think of this as being very efficient when our workloads are running on top of GCP. When they need to get at data, they can get at data that is in the Google Cloud Storage buckets in a very, very efficient manner. So, since we have fairly deep expertise on workloads like Apache Hive and Apache Spark, we've actually done work in these workloads to make sure that they can run efficiently, not just on HDFS, but also in the cloud storage connector. This is a critical part of making sure that the architecture is actually optimized for the cloud. So, at our skill and our customers are moving their workloads from on-premise to the cloud, it's not just functional parity, but they also need sort of the operational and the cost efficiency that they're looking for as they move to the cloud. So, to do that, we need to enable these fundamental disaggregated storage pattern. See, on-prem, the big win with Hadoop was we could bring the processing to where the data was. In the cloud, we need to make sure that we work well when storage and compute are disaggregated and they're scaled elastically, independent of each other. So this is a fairly fundamental architectural change. We want to make sure that we enable this in a first-class manner. >> I think that's a key point, right. I think what cloud allows you to do is scale the storage and compute independently. And so, with storing data in Google Cloud Storage, you can like scale that horizontally and then just leverage that as your storage layer. And the compute can independently scale by itself. And what this is allowing customers of HDP and HDF is store the data on GCP, on the cloud storage, and then just use the scale, the compute side of it with HDP and HDF. >> So, if you'll indulge me to a name, another Hortonworks partner for just a hypothetical. Let's say one of your customers is using IBM Data Science Experience to do TensorFlow modeling and training, can they then inside of HDP on GCP, can they use the compute infrastructure inside of GCP to do the actual modeling which is more compute intensive and then the separate decoupled storage infrastructure to do the training which is more storage intensive? Is that a capability that would available to your customers? With this integration with Google? >> Yeah, so where we are going with this is we are saying, IBM DSX and other solutions that are built on top of HDP, they can transparently take advantage of the fact that they have HDP compute infrastructure to run against. So, you can run your machine learning training jobs, you can run your scoring jobs and you can have the same unmodified DSX experience whether you're running against an on-premise HDP environment or an in-cloud HDP environment. Further, that's sort of the benefit for partners and partner solutions. From a customer standpoint, the big value prop here is that customers, they're used to securing and governing their data on-prem in their particular way with HDP, with Apache Ranger, Atlas, and so forth. So, when they move to the cloud, we want this experience to be seamless from a management standpoint. So, from a data management standpoint, we want all of their learning from a security and governance perspective to apply when they are running in Google Cloud as well. So, we've had this capability on Azure and on AWS, so with this partnership, we are announcing the same type of deep integration with GCP as well. >> So Hortonworks is that one pane of glass across all your product partners for all manner of jobs. Go ahead, Rebecca. >> Well, I just wanted to ask about, we've talked about the reason, the impetus for this. With the customer, it's more familiar for customers, it offers the seamless experience, But, can you delve a little bit into the business problems that you're solving for customers here? >> A lot of times, our customers are at various points on their cloud journey, that for some of them, it's very simple, they're like there's a broom coming by and the datacenter is going away in 12 months and I need to be in the cloud. So, this is where there is a wholesale movement of infrastructure from on-premise to the cloud. Others are exploring individual business use cases. So, for example, one of our large customers, a travel partner, so they are exploring their new pricing model and they want to roll out this pricing model in the cloud. They have on-premise infrastructure, they know they have that for a while. They are spinning up new use cases in the cloud typically for reasons of agility. So, if you, typically many of our customers, they operate large, multi-tenant clusters on-prem. That's nice for, so a very scalable compute for running large jobs. But, if you want to run, for example, a new version of Spark, you have to upgrade the entire cluster before you can do that. Whereas in this sort of model, what they can say is, they can bring up a new workload and just have the specific versions and dependency that it needs, independent of all of their other infrastructure. So this gives them agility where they can move as fast as... >> Through the containerization of the Spark jobs or whatever. >> Correct, and so containerization as well as even spinning up an entire new environment. Because, in the cloud, given that you have access to elastic compute resources, they can come and go. So, your workloads are much more independent of the underlying cluster than they are on-premise. And this is where sort of the core business benefits around agility, speed of deployment, things like that come into play. >> And also, if you look at the total cost of ownership, really take an example where customers are collecting all this information through the month. And, at month end, you want to do closing of books. And so that's a great example where you want ephemeral workloads. So this is like do it once in a month, finish the books and close the books. That's a great scenario for cloud where you don't have to on-premises create an infrastructure, keep it ready. So that's one example where now, in the new partnership, you can collect all the data through the on-premises if you want throughout the month. But, move that and leverage cloud to go ahead and scale and do this workload and finish the books and all. That's one, the second example I can give is, a lot of customers collecting, like they run their e-commerce platforms and all on-premises, let's say they're running it. They can still connect all these events through HDP that may be running on-premises with Kafka and then, what you can do is, in-cloud, in GCP, you can deploy HDP, HDF, and you can use the HDF from there for real-time stream processing. So, collect all these clickstream events, use them, make decisions like, hey, which products are selling better?, should we go ahead and give?, how many people are looking at that product?, or how many people have bought it?. That kind of aggregation and real-time at scale, now you can do in-cloud and build these hybrid architectures that are there. And enable scenarios where in past, to do that kind of stuff, you would have to procure hardware, deploy hardware, all of that. Which all goes away. In-cloud, you can do that much more flexibly and just use whatever capacity you have. >> Well, you know, ephemeral workloads are at the heart of what many enterprise data scientists do. Real-world experiments, ad-hoc experiments, with certain datasets. You build a TensorFlow model or maybe a model in Caffe or whatever and you deploy it out to a cluster and so the life of a data scientist is often nothing but a stream of new tasks that are all ephemeral in their own right but are part of an ongoing experimentation program that's, you know, they're building and testing assets that may be or may not be deployed in the production applications. That's you know, so I can see a clear need for that, well, that capability of this announcement in lots of working data science shops in the business world. >> Absolutely. >> And I think coming down to, if you really look at the partnership, right. There are two or three key areas where it's going to have a huge advantage for our customers. One is analytics at-scale at a lower cost, like total cost of ownership, reducing that, running at-scale analytics. That's one of the big things. Again, as I said, the hybrid scenarios. Most customers, enterprise customers have huge deployments of infrastructure on-premises and that's not going to go away. Over a period of time, leveraging cloud is a priority for a lot of customers but they will be in these hybrid scenarios. And what this partnership allows them to do is have these scenarios that can span across cloud and on-premises infrastructure that they are building and get business value out of all of these. And then, finally, we at Google believe that the world will be more and more real-time over a period of time. Like, we already are seeing a lot of these real-time scenarios with IoT events coming in and people making real-time decisions. And this is only going to grow. And this partnership also provides the whole streaming analytics capabilities in-cloud at-scale for customers to build these hybrid plus also real-time streaming scenarios with this package. >> Well it's clear from Google what the Hortonworks partnership gives you in this competitive space, in the multi-cloud space. It gives you that ability to support hybrid cloud scenarios. You're one of the premier public cloud providers and we all know about. And clearly now that you got, you've had the Hortonworks partnership, you have that ability to support those kinds of highly hybridized deployments for your customers, many of whom I'm sure have those requirements. >> That's perfect, exactly right. >> Well a great note to end on. Thank you so much for coming on theCUBE. Sudhir, Ram, that you so much. >> Thank you, thanks a lot. >> Thank you. >> I'm Rebecca Knight for James Kobielus, we will have more tomorrow from DataWorks. We will see you tomorrow. This is theCUBE signing off. >> From sunny San Jose. >> That's right.