(electronic music) (graphics whoosh) (graphics tinkle) >> Welcome to Las Vegas! It's theCUBE live at AWS re:Invent '22. Lisa Martin here with Dave Vellante. Dave, it is not only great to be back, but this re:Invent seems to be bigger than last year for sure. >> Oh, definitely. I'd say it's double last year. I'd say it's comparable to 2019. Maybe even a little bigger, I've heard it's the largest re:Invent ever. And we're going to talk data, one of our favorite topics. >> We're going to talk data products. We have some great guests. One of them is an alumni who's back with us. Justin Borgman, the CEO of Starburst, and Ashwin Patil also joins us, Principal AI and Data Engineering at Deloitte. Guys, welcome to the program. >> Thank you. >> Together: Thank you. >> Justin, define data products. Give us the scoop, what's goin' on with Starburst. But define data products and the value in it for organizations of productizing data. >> Mm-hmm. So, data products are curated data sets that are able to span across multiple data sets. And I think that's what's makes it particularly unique, is you can span across multiple data sources to create federated data products that allow you to really bring together the business value that you're seeking. And I think ultimately, what's driving the interest in data products is a desire to ultimately facilitate self-service consumption within the enterprise. I think that's the holy grail that we've all been building towards. And data products represents a framework for sort of how you would do that. >> So, monetization is not necessarily a criterion? >> Not necessarily. (Dave's voice drowns) >> But it could be. >> It could be. It can be internal data products or external data products. And in either case, it's really intended to facilitate easier discovery and consumption of data. >> Ashwin, bringing you into the conversation, talk about some of the revenue drivers that data products can help organizations to unlock. >> Sure. Like Justin said, there are internal and external revenue drivers. So internally, a lot of clients are focused around, hey, how do I make the most out of my modernization platform? So, a lot of them are thinking about what AI, what analytics, what can they run to drive consumption? And when you think about consumption, consumption typically requires data from across the enterprise, right? And data from the enterprise is sometimes fragmented in pieces, in places. So, we've gone from being data in too many places to now, data products, helping bring all of that together, and really aid, drive business decisions faster with more data and more accuracy, right? Externally, a lot of that has got to do with how the ecosystems are evolving for data products that use not only company data, but also the ecosystem data that includes customers, that include suppliers and vendors. >> I mean, conceptually, data products, you could say have been around a long time. When I think of financial services, I think that's always been a data product in a sense. But suddenly, there's a lot more conversation about it. There's data mesh, there's data fabric, we could talk about that too, but why do you think now it's coming to the fore again? >> Yeah, I mean, I think it's because historically, there's always been this disconnect between the people that understand data infrastructure, and the people who know the right questions to ask of the data. Generally, these have been two very distinct groups. And so, the interest in data mesh as you mentioned, and data products as a foundational element of it, is really centered around how do we bring these groups together? How do we get the people who know the data the best to participate in the process of creating data to be consumed? Ultimately, again, trying to facilitate greater self-service consumption. And I think that's the real beauty behind it. And I think increasingly, in today's world, people are realizing the data will always be decentralized to some degree. That notion of bringing everything together into one single database has never really been successfully achieved, and is probably even further from the truth at this point in time, given you've got data on-prem and multiple clouds, and multiple different systems. And so, data products and data mesh represents, again, a framework for you to sort of think about data that lives everywhere. >> We did a session this summer with (chuckles) Justin and I, and some others on the data lies. And that was one of the good ol' lies, right? There's a single source of truth. >> Justin: Right. >> And all that is, we've probably never been further from the single source of truth. But actually, you're suggesting that there's maybe multiple truths that the same data can support. Is that a right way to think about it? >> Yeah, exactly. And I think ultimately, you want a single point of access that gives you, at your fingertips, everything that your organization knows about its business today. And that's really what data products aims to do, is sort of curate that for you, and provide high quality data sets that you can trust, that you can now self-service to answer your business question. >> One of the things that, oh, go ahead. >> No, no, I was just going to say, I mean, if you pivot it from the way the usage of data has changed, right? Traditionally, IT has been in the business of providing data to the business users. Today, with more self-service being driven, we want business users to be the drivers of consumption, right? So if you take that backwards one step, it's basically saying, what data do I need to support my business needs, such that IT doesn't always have to get involved in providing that data, or providing the reports on top of that data? So, the data products concept, I think supports that thinking of business-led technology-enabled, or IT-enabled really well. >> Business led. One of the things that Adam Zelinsky talked with John Furrier about just a week or so ago in their pre re:Invent interview, was talking about the role of the data analyst going away. That everybody in an organization, regardless of function, will be able to eventually be a data analyst, and need to evaluate and analyze data for their roles. Talk about data products as a facilitator of that democratization. >> Yeah. We are seeing more and more the concept of citizen data scientists. We are seeing more and more citizens AI. What we are seeing is a general trend, as we move towards self-service, there is going to be a need for business users to be able to access data when they want, how they want, and merge data across the enterprise in ways that they haven't done before, right? Technology today, through products like data products, right, provides you the access to do that. And that's why we are going to see this movement of people of seeing people become more and more self-service oriented, where you're going to democratize the use of AI and analytics into the business users. >> Do you think, when you talk to a data analyst, by the way, about that, he or she will be like, yeah, mm, maybe, good luck with that. So, do ya think maybe there's a sort of an interim step? Because we've had these highly, ZeMac lays this out very well. We've had these highly-centralized, highly-specialized teams. The premise being, oh, that's less expensive. Perhaps data analysts, like functions, get put into the line of business. Do you see that as a bridge or a stepping stone? Because it feels like it's quite a distance between what a data analyst does today, and this nirvana that we talk about. What are your thoughts on that? >> Yeah, I mean, I think there's possibly a new role around a data product manager. Much the way you have product managers in the products you actually build to sell, you might need data product managers to help facilitate and curate the high quality data products that others can consume. And I think that becomes an interesting and important, a skill set. Much the way that data scientist was created as a occupation, if you will, maybe 10 years ago, when previously, those were statisticians, or other names. >> Right. A big risk that many clients are seeing around data products is, how do you drive governance? And to that, to the point that Justin's making, we are going to see that role evolve where governance in the world, where data products are getting democratized is going to become increasingly important in terms of how are data products being generated, how is the propensity of data products towards a more governed environment being managed? And that's going to continue to play an important role as data products evolve. >> Okay, so how do you guys fit, because you take ZeMac's four principles, domain ownership, data as product. And that creates two problems. Governance. (chuckles) Right? How do you automate, and self-service, infrastructure and automated governance. >> Yep. >> Tell us what role Starburst plays in solving all of those, but the latter two in particular. >> Yeah. Well, we're working on all four of those dimensions to some degree, but I think ultimately, what we're focused today is the governance piece, providing fine-grained access controls, which is so important, if you're going to have a single point of access, you better have a way of controlling who has access to what. But secondly, data products allows you to really abstract away or decouple where the data is stored from the business meaning of the data. And I think that's what's so key here is, if we're going to ultimately democratize data as we've talked about, we need to change the conversation from a very storage-centric world, like, oh, that table lives in this system or that system, or that system. And make it much more about the data, and the value that it represents. And I think that's what data products aims to do. >> What about data fabric? I have to say, I'm confused by data fabric. I read this, I feel like Gartner just threw it in there to muck it up. And say, no, no, we get to make up the terms, but I've read data mesh versus data fabric, is data fabric just more sort of the physical infrastructure? And data mesh is more of an organizational construct, or how do you see it? >> Yeah, I'm happy to take that or. So, I mean, to me, it's a little bit of potato potato. I think there are some subtle differences. Data fabric is a little bit more about data movement. Whereas, I think data mesh is a little bit more about accessing the data where it lies. But they're both trying to solve the similar problem, which is that we have data in a wide variety of different data sets. And for us to actually analyze it, we need to have a single view. >> Because Gartner hype cycle says data mesh is DOA- >> Justin: I know. >> Which I think is complete BS, I think is real. You talk to customers that are doing it, they're doing it on AWS, they're trying to extend it across clouds, I mean, it's a real trend. I mean, anyway, that's how I see it. >> Yeah. I feel the word data fabric many a times gets misused. Because when you think about the digitization movement that happened, started almost a decade ago, many companies tried to digitize or create digital twins of their systems into the data world, right? So, everything has an underlying data fabric that replicates what's happening transactionally, or otherwise in the real world. What data mesh does is creates structure that works complimentary to the data fabric, that then lends itself to data products, right? So to me, data products becomes a medium, which drives the connection between data mesh and data fabric into the real world for usage and consumption. >> You should write for Gartner. (all laugh) That's the best explanation I've heard. That made sense! >> That really did. That was excellent. So, when we think about any company these days has to be a data company, whether it's your grocery store, a gas station, a car dealer, what can companies do to start productizing their data, so that they can actually unlock new revenue streams, new routes to market? What are some steps and recommendations that you have? Justin, we'll start with you. >> Sure. I would say the first thing is find data that is ultimately valuable to the consumers within your business, and create a product of it. And the way you do that at Starburst is allow you to essentially create a view of your data that can span multiple data sources. So again, we're decoupling where the data lives. That might be a table that lives in a traditional data warehouse, a table that lives in an operational system like Mongo, a table that lives in a data lake. And you can actually join those together, and represent it as a view, and now make it easily consumable. And so, the end user doesn't need to know, did that live in a data warehouse, an operational database, or a data lake? I'm just accessing that. And I think that's a great, easy way to start in your journey. Because I think if you absorb all the elements of data mesh at once, it can feel overwhelming. And I think that's a great way to start. >> Irrespective of physical location. >> Yes. >> Right? >> Precisely. Yep, multicloud, hybrid cloud, you name it. >> And when you think about the broader landscape, right? For the traditionally, companies that only looked at internal data as a way of driving business decisions. More and more, as things evolve into industry, clouds, or ecosystem data, and companies start going beyond their four walls in terms of the data that they manage or the data that they use to make decisions, I think data products are going to play more and more an important part in that construct where you don't govern all the data that our entities within that ecosystem will govern parts of their data, but that data lives together in the form of data products that are governed somewhat centrally. I mean, kind of like a blockchain system, but not really. >> Justin, for our folks here, as we kind of wrap the segment here, what's the bumper sticker for Starburst, and how you're helping organizations to really be able to build data products that add value to their organization? >> I would say analytics anywhere. Our core ethos is, we want to give you the ability to access data wherever it lives, and understand your business holistically. And our query engine allows you to do that from a query perspective, and data products allows you to bring that up a level and make it consumable. >> Make it consumable. Ashwin, last question for you, here we are, day one of re:Invent, loads of people behind us. Tomorrow all the great keynotes kick up. What are you hoping to take away from re:Invent '22? >> Well, I'm hoping to understand how all of these different entities that are represented here connect with each other, right? And to me, Starburst is an important player in terms of how do you drive connectivity. And to me, as we help plans from a Deloitte perspective, drive that business value, connectivity across all of the technology players is extremely important part. So, integration across those technology players is what I'm trying to get from re:Invent here. >> And so, you guys do, you're dot connectors. (Ashwin chuckles) >> Exactly, excellent. Guys, thank you so much for joining David and me on the program tonight. We appreciate your insights, your time, and probably the best explanation of data fabric versus data mesh. (Justin chuckles) And data products that we've maybe ever had on the show! We appreciate your time, thank you. >> Together: Thank you- >> Thanks, guys. >> All right. For our guests and Dave Vellante, I'm Lisa Martin, you're watching theCUBE, the leader in enterprise and emerging tech coverage. (electronic music)

(energetic music) >> Okay, we're back with Justin Borgman, CEO of Starburst, Richard Jarvis is the CTO of EMIS Health, and Teresa Tung is the cloud first technologist from Accenture. We're on to lie number three. And that is the claim that today's "Modern Data Stack" is actually modern. So (chuckles), I guess that's the lie. Or, is that it's not modern. Justin, what do you say? >> Yeah, I think new isn't modern. Right? I think it's the new data stack. It's the cloud data stack, but that doesn't necessarily mean it's modern. I think a lot of the components actually, are exactly the same as what we've had for 40 years. Rather than Teradata, you have Snowflake. Rather than Informatica, you have Fivetran. So, it's the same general stack, just, y'know, a cloud version of it. And I think a lot of the challenges that have plagued us for 40 years still maintain. >> So, let me come back to you Justin. Okay, but there are differences, right? You can scale. You can throw resources at the problem. You can separate compute from storage. You really, there's a lot of money being thrown at that by venture capitalists, and Snowflake you mentioned, its competitors. So that's different. Is it not? Is that not at least an aspect of modern dial it up, dial it down? So what do you say to that? >> Well, it is. It's certainly taking, y'know what the cloud offers and taking advantage of that. But it's important to note that the cloud data warehouses out there are really just separating their compute from their storage. So it's allowing them to scale up and down, but your data's still stored in a proprietary format. You're still locked in. You still have to ingest the data to get it even prepared for analysis. So a lot of the same structural constraints that exist with the old enterprise data warehouse model on-preem still exist. Just yes, a little bit more elastic now because the cloud offers that. >> So Teresa, let me go to you, 'cause you have cloud-first in your title. So, what's say you to this conversation? >> Well, even the cloud providers are looking towards more of a cloud continuum, right? So the centralized cloud as we know it, maybe data lake, data warehouse in the central place, that's not even how the cloud providers are looking at it. They have use query services. Every provider has one that really expands those queries to be beyond a single location. And if we look at a lot of where our- the future goes, right? That's going to very much fall the same thing. There was going to be more edge. There's going to be more on-premise, because of data sovereignty, data gravity, because you're working with different parts of the business that have already made major cloud investments in different cloud providers, right? So, there's a lot of reasons why the modern, I guess, the next modern generation of the data stack needs to be much more federated. >> Okay, so Richard, how do you deal with this? You've obviously got, you know, the technical debt, the existing infrastructure, it's on the books. You don't want to just throw it out. A lot of conversation about modernizing applications, which a lot of times is, you know, of microservices layer on top of legacy apps. How do you think about the Modern Data Stack? >> Well, I think probably the first thing to say is that the stack really has to include the processes and people around the data as well is all well and good changing the technology. But if you don't modernize how people use that technology, then you're not going to be able to, to scale because just 'cause you can scale CPU and storage doesn't mean you can get more people to use your data to generate you more value for the business. And so what we've been looking at is really changing in very much aligned to data products and, and data mesh. How do you enable more people to consume the service and have the stack respond in a way that keeps costs low? Because that's important for our customers consuming this data but also allows people to occasionally run enormous queries and then tick along with smaller ones when required. And it's a good job we did because during COVID all of a sudden we had enormous pressures on our data platform to answer really important life threatening queries. And if we couldn't scale both our data stack and our teams we wouldn't have been able to answer those as quickly as we had. So I think the stack needs to support a scalable business not just the technology itself. >> Well thank you for that. So Justin let's, let's try to break down what the critical aspects are of the modern data stack. So you think about the past, you know, five seven years cloud obviously has given a different pricing model. Derisked experimentation, you know that we talked about the ability to scale up scale down, but it's, I'm taking away that that's not enough. Based on what Richard just said, the modern data stack has to serve the business and enable the business to build data products. I buy that. I'm you a big fan of the data mesh concepts, even though we're early days. So what are the critical aspects if you had to think about you know, the, maybe putting some guardrails and definitions around the modern data stack, what does that look like? What are some of the attributes and, and principles there >> Of how it should look like or, or how >> Yeah. What it should be? >> Yeah. Yeah. Well, I think, you know, in, in Theresa mentioned this in in a previous segment about the data warehouse is not necessarily going to disappear. It just becomes one node, one element of the overall data mesh. And I certainly agree with that. So by no means, are we suggesting that, you know Snowflake or what Redshift or whatever cloud data warehouse you may be using is going to disappear, but it's it's not going to become the end all be all. It's not the, the central single source of truth. And I think that's the paradigm shift that needs to occur. And I think it's also worth noting that those who were the early adopters of the modern data stack were primarily digital, native born in the cloud young companies who had the benefit of of idealism. They had the benefit of starting with a clean slate that does not reflect the vast majority of enterprises. And even those companies, as they grow up, mature out of that ideal state, they go by a business. Now they've got something on another cloud provider that has a different data stack and they have to deal with that heterogeneity that is just change and change is a part of life. And so I think there is an element here that is almost philosophical. It's like, do you believe in an absolute ideal where I can just fit everything into one place or do I believe in reality? And I think the far more pragmatic approach is really what data mesh represents. So to answer your question directly, I think it's adding you know, the ability to access data that lives outside of the data warehouse, maybe living in open data formats in a data lake or accessing operational systems as well. Maybe you want to directly access data that lives in an Oracle database or a Mongo database or, or what have you. So creating that flexibility to really future proof yourself from the inevitable change that you will you won't encounter over time. >> So thank you. So Theresa, based on what Justin just said, I I might take away there is it's inclusive whether it's a data mart, data hub, data lake, data warehouse, just a node on the mesh. Okay. I get that. Does that include Theresa on, on Preem data? Obviously it has to. What are you seeing in terms of the ability to, to take that data mesh concept on Preem I mean most implementations I've seen and data mesh, frankly really aren't, you know adhering to the philosophy there. Maybe, maybe it's data lake and maybe it's using glue. You look at what JPMC is doing, HelloFresh, a lot of stuff happening on the AWS cloud in that, you know, closed stack, if you will. What's the answer to that Theresa? >> I mean, I think it's a killer case for data mesh. The fact that you have valuable data sources on Preem, and then yet you still want to modernize and take the best of cloud. Cloud is still, like we mentioned, there's a lot of great reasons for it around the economics and the way ability to tap into the innovation that the cloud providers are giving around data and AI architecture. It's an easy button. So the mesh allows you to have the best of both world. You can start using the data products on Preem, or in the existing systems that are working already. It's meaningful for the business. At the same time, you can modernize the ones that make business sense because it needs better performance. It needs, you know, something that is, is cheaper or or maybe just tapping into better analytics to get better insights, right? So you're going to be able to stretch and really have the best of both worlds. That, again, going back to Richard's point, that is meaningful by the business. Not everything has to have that one size fits all set a tool. >> Okay. Thank you. So Richard, you know, talking about data as product wonder if we could give us your perspectives here what are the advantages of treating data as a product? What, what role do data products have in the modern data stack? We talk about monetizing data. What are your thoughts on data products? >> So for us, one of the most important data products that we've been creating is taking data that is healthcare data across a wide variety of different settings. So information about patients, demographics about their their treatment, about their medications and so on, and taking that into a standards format that can be utilized by a wide variety of different researchers because misinterpreting that data or having the data not presented in the way that the user is expecting means that you generate the wrong insight and in any business that's clearly not a desirable outcome but when that insight is so critical as it might be in healthcare or some security settings you really have to have gone to the trouble of understanding the data, presenting it in a format that everyone can clearly agree on. And then letting people consume in a very structured managed way, even if that data comes from a variety of different sources in the first place. And so our data product journey has really begun by standardizing data across a number of different silos through the data mesh. So we can present out both internally and through the right governance externally to, to researchers. >> So that data product through whatever APIs is is accessible, it's discoverable, but it's obviously got to be governed as well. You mentioned appropriately provided to internally. >> Yeah. >> But also, you know, external folks as well. So the, so you've, you've architected that capability today? >> We have and because the data is standard it can generate value much more quickly and we can be sure of the security and value that that's providing, because the data product isn't just about formatting the data into the correct tables, it's understanding what it means to redact the data or to remove certain rows from it or to interpret what a date actually means. Is it the start of the contract or the start of the treatment or the date of birth of a patient? These things can be lost in the data storage without having the proper product management around the data to say in a very clear business context what does this data mean, and what does it mean to process this data for a particular use case. >> Yeah, it makes sense. It's got the context. If the, if the domains on the data, you know you got to cut through a lot of the, the centralized teams, the technical teams that that data agnostic, they don't really have that context. All right, let's end. Justin. How does Starburst fit into this modern data stack? Bring us home. >> Yeah. So I think for us it's really providing our customers with, you know the flexibility to operate and analyze data that lives in a wide variety of different systems. Ultimately giving them that optionality, you know and optionality provides the ability to reduce costs store more in a data lake rather than data warehouse. It provides the ability for the fastest time to insight to access the data directly where it lives. And ultimately with this concept of data products that we've now, you know incorporated into our offering as well you can really create and, and curate, you know data as a product to be shared and consumed. So we're trying to help enable the data mesh, you know model and make that an appropriate compliment to you know, the modern data stack that people have today. >> Excellent. Hey, I want to thank Justin, Teresa, and Richard for joining us today. You guys are great. Big believers in the in the data mesh concept, and I think, you know we're seeing the future of data architecture. So thank you. Now, remember, all these conversations are going to be available on the cube.net for on demand viewing. You can also go to starburst.io. They have some great content on the website and they host some really thought provoking interviews and they have awesome resources. Lots of data mesh conversations over there and really good stuff in, in the resource section. So check that out. Thanks for watching the "Data Doesn't Lie... or Does It?" made possible by Starburst data. This is Dave Vellante for the Cube, and we'll see you next time. (upbeat music)

>>We're back with Jess Borgman of Starburst and Richard Jarvis of EVAs health. Okay. We're gonna get into lie. Number two, and that is this an open source based platform cannot give you the performance and control that you can get with a proprietary system. Is that a lie? Justin, the enterprise data warehouse has been pretty dominant and has evolved and matured. Its stack has mature over the years. Why is it not the default platform for data? >>Yeah, well, I think that's become a lie over time. So I, I think, you know, if we go back 10 or 12 years ago with the advent of the first data lake really around Hudu, that probably was true that you couldn't get the performance that you needed to run fast, interactive, SQL queries in a data lake. Now a lot's changed in 10 or 12 years. I remember in the very early days, people would say, you'll, you'll never get performance because you need to be column. You need to store data in a column format. And then, you know, column formats were introduced to, to data lake. You have Parque ORC file in aro that were created to ultimately deliver performance out of that. So, okay. We got, you know, largely over the performance hurdle, you know, more recently people will say, well, you don't have the ability to do updates and deletes like a traditional data warehouse. >>And now we've got the creation of new data formats, again, like iceberg and Delta and hoote that do allow for updates and delete. So I think the data lake has continued to mature. And I remember a quote from, you know, Kurt Monash many years ago where he said, you know, it takes six or seven years to build a functional database. I think that's that's right. And now we've had almost a decade go by. So, you know, these technologies have matured to really deliver very, very close to the same level performance and functionality of, of cloud data warehouses. So I think the, the reality is that's become a lie and now we have large giant hyperscale internet companies that, you know, don't have the traditional data warehouse at all. They do all of their analytics in a data lake. So I think we've, we've proven that it's very much possible today. >>Thank you for that. And so Richard, talk about your perspective as a practitioner in terms of what open brings you versus, I mean, the clothes is it's open as a moving target. I remember Unix used to be open systems and so it's, it is an evolving, you know, spectrum, but, but from your perspective, what does open give you that you can't get from a proprietary system where you are fearful of in a proprietary system? >>I, I suppose for me open buys us the ability to be unsure about the future, because one thing that's always true about technology is it evolves in a, a direction, slightly different to what people expect and what you don't want to end up done is backed itself into a corner that then prevents it from innovating. So if you have chosen the technology and you've stored trillions of records in that technology and suddenly a new way of processing or machine learning comes out, you wanna be able to take advantage your competitive edge might depend upon it. And so I suppose for us, we acknowledge that we don't have perfect vision of what the future might be. And so by backing open storage technologies, we can apply a number of different technologies to the processing of that data. And that gives us the ability to remain relevant, innovate on our data storage. And we have bought our way out of the, any performance concerns because we can use cloud scale infrastructure to scale up and scale down as we need. And so we don't have the concerns that we don't have enough hardware today to process what we want to do, want to achieve. We can just scale up when we need it and scale back down. So open source has really allowed us to maintain the being at the cutting edge. >>So Jess, let me play devil's advocate here a little bit, and I've talked to JAK about this and you know, obviously her vision is there's an open source that, that data mesh is open source, an open source tooling, and it's not a proprietary, you know, you're not gonna buy a data mesh. You're gonna build it with, with open source toolings and, and vendors like you are gonna support it, but come back to sort of today, you can get to market with a proprietary solution faster. I'm gonna make that statement. You tell me if it's a lie and then you can say, okay, we support Apache iceberg. We're gonna support open source tooling, take a company like VMware, not really in the data business, but how, the way they embraced Kubernetes and, and you know, every new open source thing that comes along, they say, we do that too. Why can't proprietary systems do that and be as effective? >>Yeah, well I think at least with the, within the data landscape saying that you can access open data formats like iceberg or, or others is, is a bit dis disingenuous because really what you're selling to your customer is a certain degree of performance, a certain SLA, and you know, those cloud data warehouses that can reach beyond their own proprietary storage drop all the performance that they were able to provide. So it is, it reminds me kind of, of, again, going back 10 or 12 years ago when everybody had a connector to hit and that they thought that was the solution, right? But the reality was, you know, a connector was not the same as running workloads in hit back then. And I think similarly, you know, being able to connect to an external table that lives in an open data format, you know, you're, you're not going to give it the performance that your customers are accustomed to. And at the end of the day, they're always going to be predisposed. They're always going to be incentivized to get that data ingested into the data warehouse, cuz that's where they have control. And you know, the bottom line is the database industry has really been built around vendor lockin. I mean, from the start, how, how many people love Oracle today, but our customers, nonetheless, I think, you know, lockin is, is, is part of this industry. And I think that's really what we're trying to change with open data formats. >>Well, it's interesting remind of when I, you know, I see the, the gas price, the TSR gas price I, I drive up and then I say, oh, that's the cash price credit card. I gotta pay 20 cents more, but okay. But so the, the argument then, so let me, let me come back to you, Justin. So what's wrong with saying, Hey, we support open data formats, but yeah, you're gonna get better performance if you, if you, you keep it into our closed system, are you saying that long term that's gonna come back and bite you cuz you're gonna end up, you mentioned Oracle, you mentioned Teradata. Yeah. That's by, by implication, you're saying that's where snowflake customers are headed. >>Yeah, absolutely. I think this is a movie that, you know, we've all seen before. At least those of us who've been in the industry long enough to, to see this movie play over a couple times. So I do think that's the future. And I think, you know, I loved what Richard said. I actually wrote it down. Cause I thought it was an amazing quote. He said, it buys us the ability to be unsure of the future. That that pretty much says it all the, the future is unknowable and the reality is using open data formats. You remain interoperable with any technology you want to utilize. If you want to use spark to train a machine learning model and you wanna use Starbust to query via sequel, that's totally cool. They can both work off the same exact, you know, data, data sets by contrast, if you're, you know, focused on a proprietary model, then you're kind of locked in again to that model. I think the same applies to data, sharing to data products, to a wide variety of, of aspects of the data landscape that a proprietary approach kind of closes you and, and locks you in. >>So I, I would say this Richard, I'd love to get your thoughts on it. Cause I talked to a lot of Oracle customers, not as many te data customers there, but, but a lot of Oracle customers and they, you know, they'll admit yeah, you know, the Jammin us on price and the license cost, but we do get value out of it. And so my question to you, Richard, is, is do the, let's call it data warehouse systems or the proprietary systems. Are they gonna deliver a greater ROI sooner? And is that in allure of, of that customers, you know, are attracted to, or can open platforms deliver as fast an ROI? >>I think the answer to that is it can depend a bit. It depends on your business's skillset. So we are lucky that we have a number of proprietary teams that work in databases that provide our operational data capability. And we have teams of analytics and big data experts who can work with open data sets and open data formats. And so for those different teams, they can get to an ROI more quickly with different technologies for the business though, we can't do better for our operational data stores than proprietary databases. Today we can back off very tight SLAs to them. We can demonstrate reliability from millions of hours of those databases being run at enterprise scale, but for an analytics workload where increasing our business is growing in that direction, we can't do better than open data formats with cloud-based data mesh type technologies. And so it's not a simple answer. That one will always be the right answer for our business. We definitely have times when proprietary databases provide a capability that we couldn't easily represent or replicate with open technologies. >>Yeah. Richard, stay with you. You mentioned, you know, you know, some things before that, that strike me, you know, the data brick snowflake, you know, thing is always a lot of fun for analysts like me. You've got data bricks coming at it. Richard, you mentioned you have a lot of rockstar, data engineers, data bricks coming at it from a data engineering heritage. You get snowflake coming at it from an analytics heritage. Those two worlds are, are colliding people like PJI Mohan said, you know what? I think it's actually harder to play in the data engineering. So IE, it's easier to for data engineering world to go into the analytics world versus the reverse, but thinking about up and coming engineers and developers preparing for this future of data engineering and data analytics, how, how should they be thinking about the future? What, what's your advice to those young people? >>So I think I'd probably fall back on general programming skill sets. So the advice that I saw years ago was if you have open source technologies, the pythons and Javas on your CV, you command a 20% pay, hike over people who can only do proprietary programming languages. And I think that's true of data technologies as well. And from a business point of view, that makes sense. I'd rather spend the money that I save on proprietary licenses on better engineers, because they can provide more value to the business that can innovate us beyond our competitors. So I think I would my advice to people who are starting here or trying to build teams to capitalize on data assets is begin with open license, free capabilities because they're very cheap to experiment with. And they generate a lot of interest from people who want to join you as a business. And you can make them very successful early, early doors with, with your analytics journey. >>It's interesting. Again, analysts like myself, we do a lot of TCO work and have over the last 20 plus years and in the world of Oracle, you know, normally it's the staff, that's the biggest nut in total cost of ownership, not an Oracle. It's the it's the license cost is by far the biggest component in the, in the blame pie. All right, Justin, help us close out this segment. We've been talking about this sort of data mesh open, closed snowflake data bricks. Where does Starburst sort of as this engine for the data lake data lake house, the data warehouse, it, it fit in this, in this world. >>Yeah. So our view on how the future ultimately unfolds is we think that data lakes will be a natural center of gravity for a lot of the reasons that we described open data formats, lowest total cost of ownership, because you get to choose the cheapest storage available to you. Maybe that's S3 or Azure data lake storage or Google cloud storage, or maybe it's on-prem object storage that you bought at a, at a really good price. So ultimately storing a lot of data in a data lake makes a lot of sense, but I think what makes our perspective unique is we still don't think you're gonna get everything there either. We think that basically centralization of all your data assets is just an impossible endeavor. And so you wanna be able to access data that lives outside of the lake as well. So we kind of think of the lake as maybe the biggest place by volume in terms of how much data you have, but to, to have comprehensive analytics and to truly understand your business and understanding holistically, you need to be able to go access other data sources as well. And so that's the role that we wanna play is to be a single point of access for our customers, provide the right level of fine grained access controls so that the right people have access to the right data and ultimately make it easy to discover and consume via, you know, the creation of data products as well. >>Great. Okay. Thanks guys. Right after this quick break, we're gonna be back to debate whether the cloud data model that we see emerging and the so-called modern data stack is really modern or is it the same wine new bottle when it comes to data architectures, you're watching the cube, the leader in enterprise and emerging tech coverage.

(bright upbeat music) >> In 2011, early Facebook employee and Cloudera co-founder Jeff Hammerbacher famously said, "The best minds of my generation are thinking about how to get people to click on ads, and that sucks!" Let's face it. More than a decade later, organizations continue to be frustrated with how difficult it is to get value from data and build a truly agile and data-driven enterprise. What does that even mean, you ask? Well, it means that everyone in the organization has the data they need when they need it in a context that's relevant to advance the mission of an organization. Now, that could mean cutting costs, could mean increasing profits, driving productivity, saving lives, accelerating drug discovery, making better diagnoses, solving supply chain problems, predicting weather disasters, simplifying processes, and thousands of other examples where data can completely transform people's lives beyond manipulating internet users to behave a certain way. We've heard the prognostications about the possibilities of data before and in fairness we've made progress, but the hard truth is the original promises of master data management, enterprise data warehouses, data marts, data hubs, and yes even data lakes were broken and left us wanting for more. Welcome to The Data Doesn't Lie... Or Does It? A series of conversations produced by theCUBE and made possible by Starburst Data. I'm your host, Dave Vellante, and joining me today are three industry experts. Justin Borgman is the co-founder and CEO of Starburst, Richard Jarvis is the CTO at EMIS Health, and Teresa Tung is cloud first technologist at Accenture. Today, we're going to have a candid discussion that will expose the unfulfilled, and yes, broken promises of a data past. We'll expose data lies: big lies, little lies, white lies, and hidden truths. And we'll challenge, age old data conventions and bust some data myths. We're debating questions like is the demise of a single source of truth inevitable? Will the data warehouse ever have feature parity with the data lake or vice versa? Is the so-called modern data stack simply centralization in the cloud, AKA the old guards model in new cloud close? How can organizations rethink their data architectures and regimes to realize the true promises of data? Can and will an open ecosystem deliver on these promises in our lifetimes? We're spanning much of the Western world today. Richard is in the UK, Teresa is on the West Coast, and Justin is in Massachusetts with me. I'm in theCUBE studios, about 30 miles outside of Boston. Folks, welcome to the program. Thanks for coming on. >> Thanks for having us. >> Okay, let's get right into it. You're very welcome. Now, here's the first lie. The most effective data architecture is one that is centralized with a team of data specialists serving various lines of business. What do you think Justin? >> Yeah, definitely a lie. My first startup was a company called Hadapt, which was an early SQL engine for IDU that was acquired by Teradata. And when I got to Teradata, of course, Teradata is the pioneer of that central enterprise data warehouse model. One of the things that I found fascinating was that not one of their customers had actually lived up to that vision of centralizing all of their data into one place. They all had data silos. They all had data in different systems. They had data on prem, data in the cloud. Those companies were acquiring other companies and inheriting their data architecture. So despite being the industry leader for 40 years, not one of their customers truly had everything in one place. So I think definitely history has proven that to be a lie. >> So Richard, from a practitioner's point of view, what are your thoughts? I mean, there's a lot of pressure to cut cost, keep things centralized, serve the business as best as possible from that standpoint. What does your experience show? >> Yeah, I mean, I think I would echo Justin's experience really that we as a business have grown up through acquisition, through storing data in different places sometimes to do information governance in different ways to store data in a platform that's close to data experts people who really understand healthcare data from pharmacies or from doctors. And so, although if you were starting from a greenfield site and you were building something brand new, you might be able to centralize all the data and all of the tooling and teams in one place. The reality is that businesses just don't grow up like that. And it's just really impossible to get that academic perfection of storing everything in one place. >> Teresa, I feel like Sarbanes-Oxley have kind of saved the data warehouse, right? (laughs) You actually did have to have a single version of the truth for certain financial data, but really for some of those other use cases I mentioned, I do feel like the industry has kind of let us down. What's your take on this? Where does it make sense to have that sort of centralized approach versus where does it make sense to maybe decentralize? >> I think you got to have centralized governance, right? So from the central team, for things like Sarbanes-Oxley, for things like security, for certain very core data sets having a centralized set of roles, responsibilities to really QA, right? To serve as a design authority for your entire data estate, just like you might with security, but how it's implemented has to be distributed. Otherwise, you're not going to be able to scale, right? So being able to have different parts of the business really make the right data investments for their needs. And then ultimately, you're going to collaborate with your partners. So partners that are not within the company, right? External partners. We're going to see a lot more data sharing and model creation. And so you're definitely going to be decentralized. >> So Justin, you guys last, jeez, I think it was about a year ago, had a session on data mesh. It was a great program. You invited Zhamak Dehghani. Of course, she's the creator of the data mesh. One of our fundamental premises is that you've got this hyper specialized team that you've got to go through if you want anything. But at the same time, these individuals actually become a bottleneck, even though they're some of the most talented people in the organization. So I guess, a question for you Richard. How do you deal with that? Do you organize so that there are a few sort of rock stars that build cubes and the like or have you had any success in sort of decentralizing with your constituencies that data model? >> Yeah. So we absolutely have got rockstar data scientists and data guardians, if you like. People who understand what it means to use this data, particularly the data that we use at EMIS is very private, it's healthcare information. And some of the rules and regulations around using the data are very complex and strict. So we have to have people who understand the usage of the data, then people who understand how to build models, how to process the data effectively. And you can think of them like consultants to the wider business because a pharmacist might not understand how to structure a SQL query, but they do understand how they want to process medication information to improve patient lives. And so that becomes a consulting type experience from a set of rock stars to help a more decentralized business who needs to understand the data and to generate some valuable output. >> Justin, what do you say to a customer or prospect that says, "Look, Justin. I got a centralized team and that's the most cost effective way to serve the business. Otherwise, I got duplication." What do you say to that? >> Well, I would argue it's probably not the most cost effective, and the reason being really twofold. I think, first of all, when you are deploying a enterprise data warehouse model, the data warehouse itself is very expensive, generally speaking. And so you're putting all of your most valuable data in the hands of one vendor who now has tremendous leverage over you for many, many years to come. I think that's the story at Oracle or Teradata or other proprietary database systems. But the other aspect I think is that the reality is those central data warehouse teams, as much as they are experts in the technology, they don't necessarily understand the data itself. And this is one of the core tenets of data mesh that Zhamak writes about is this idea of the domain owners actually know the data the best. And so by not only acknowledging that data is generally decentralized, and to your earlier point about Sarbanes-Oxley, maybe saving the data warehouse, I would argue maybe GDPR and data sovereignty will destroy it because data has to be decentralized for those laws to be compliant. But I think the reality is the data mesh model basically says data's decentralized and we're going to turn that into an asset rather than a liability. And we're going to turn that into an asset by empowering the people that know the data the best to participate in the process of curating and creating data products for consumption. So I think when you think about it that way, you're going to get higher quality data and faster time to insight, which is ultimately going to drive more revenue for your business and reduce costs. So I think that that's the way I see the two models comparing and contrasting. >> So do you think the demise of the data warehouse is inevitable? Teresa, you work with a lot of clients. They're not just going to rip and replace their existing infrastructure. Maybe they're going to build on top of it, but what does that mean? Does that mean the EDW just becomes less and less valuable over time or it's maybe just isolated to specific use cases? What's your take on that? >> Listen, I still would love all my data within a data warehouse. I would love it mastered, would love it owned by a central team, right? I think that's still what I would love to have. That's just not the reality, right? The investment to actually migrate and keep that up to date, I would say it's a losing battle. Like we've been trying to do it for a long time. Nobody has the budgets and then data changes, right? There's going to be a new technology that's going to emerge that we're going to want to tap into. There's going to be not enough investment to bring all the legacy, but still very useful systems into that centralized view. So you keep the data warehouse. I think it's a very, very valuable, very high performance tool for what it's there for, but you could have this new mesh layer that still takes advantage of the things I mentioned: the data products in the systems that are meaningful today, and the data products that actually might span a number of systems. Maybe either those that either source systems with the domains that know it best, or the consumer-based systems or products that need to be packaged in a way that'd be really meaningful for that end user, right? Each of those are useful for a different part of the business and making sure that the mesh actually allows you to use all of them. >> So, Richard, let me ask you. Take Zhamak's principles back to those. You got the domain ownership and data as product. Okay, great. Sounds good. But it creates what I would argue are two challenges: self-serve infrastructure, let's park that for a second, and then in your industry, one of the most regulated, most sensitive, computational governance. How do you automate and ensure federated governance in that mesh model that Teresa was just talking about? >> Well, it absolutely depends on some of the tooling and processes that you put in place around those tools to centralize the security and the governance of the data. And I think although a data warehouse makes that very simple 'cause it's a single tool, it's not impossible with some of the data mesh technologies that are available. And so what we've done at EMIS is we have a single security layer that sits on top of our data mesh, which means that no matter which user is accessing which data source, we go through a well audited, well understood security layer. That means that we know exactly who's got access to which data field, which data tables. And then everything that they do is audited in a very kind of standard way regardless of the underlying data storage technology. So for me, although storing the data in one place might not be possible, understanding where your source of truth is and securing that in a common way is still a valuable approach, and you can do it without having to bring all that data into a single bucket so that it's all in one place. And so having done that and investing quite heavily in making that possible has paid dividends in terms of giving wider access to the platform, and ensuring that only data that's available under GDPR and other regulations is being used by the data users. >> Yeah. So Justin, we always talk about data democratization, and up until recently, they really haven't been line of sight as to how to get there, but do you have anything to add to this because you're essentially doing analytic queries with data that's all dispersed all over. How are you seeing your customers handle this challenge? >> Yeah, I mean, I think data products is a really interesting aspect of the answer to that. It allows you to, again, leverage the data domain owners, the people who know the data the best, to create data as a product ultimately to be consumed. And we try to represent that in our product as effectively, almost eCommerce like experience where you go and discover and look for the data products that have been created in your organization, and then you can start to consume them as you'd like. And so really trying to build on that notion of data democratization and self-service, and making it very easy to discover and start to use with whatever BI tool you may like or even just running SQL queries yourself. >> Okay guys, grab a sip of water. After the short break, we'll be back to debate whether proprietary or open platforms are the best path to the future of data excellence. Keep it right there. (bright upbeat music)

>>In 2011, early Facebook employee and Cloudera co-founder Jeff Ocker famously said the best minds of my generation are thinking about how to get people to click on ads. And that sucks. Let's face it more than a decade later organizations continue to be frustrated with how difficult it is to get value from data and build a truly agile data-driven enterprise. What does that even mean? You ask? Well, it means that everyone in the organization has the data they need when they need it. In a context that's relevant to advance the mission of an organization. Now that could mean cutting cost could mean increasing profits, driving productivity, saving lives, accelerating drug discovery, making better diagnoses, solving, supply chain problems, predicting weather disasters, simplifying processes, and thousands of other examples where data can completely transform people's lives beyond manipulating internet users to behave a certain way. We've heard the prognostications about the possibilities of data before and in fairness we've made progress, but the hard truth is the original promises of master data management, enterprise data, warehouses, data marts, data hubs, and yes, even data lakes were broken and left us wanting from more welcome to the data doesn't lie, or doesn't a series of conversations produced by the cube and made possible by Starburst data. >>I'm your host, Dave Lanta and joining me today are three industry experts. Justin Borgman is this co-founder and CEO of Starburst. Richard Jarvis is the CTO at EMI health and Theresa tongue is cloud first technologist at Accenture. Today we're gonna have a candid discussion that will expose the unfulfilled and yes, broken promises of a data past we'll expose data lies, big lies, little lies, white lies, and hidden truths. And we'll challenge, age old data conventions and bust some data myths. We're debating questions like is the demise of a single source of truth. Inevitable will the data warehouse ever have featured parody with the data lake or vice versa is the so-called modern data stack, simply centralization in the cloud, AKA the old guards model in new cloud close. How can organizations rethink their data architectures and regimes to realize the true promises of data can and will and open ecosystem deliver on these promises in our lifetimes, we're spanning much of the Western world today. Richard is in the UK. Teresa is on the west coast and Justin is in Massachusetts with me. I'm in the cube studios about 30 miles outside of Boston folks. Welcome to the program. Thanks for coming on. Thanks for having us. Let's get right into it. You're very welcome. Now here's the first lie. The most effective data architecture is one that is centralized with a team of data specialists serving various lines of business. What do you think Justin? >>Yeah, definitely a lie. My first startup was a company called hit adapt, which was an early SQL engine for hit that was acquired by Teradata. And when I got to Teradata, of course, Teradata is the pioneer of that central enterprise data warehouse model. One of the things that I found fascinating was that not one of their customers had actually lived up to that vision of centralizing all of their data into one place. They all had data silos. They all had data in different systems. They had data on prem data in the cloud. You know, those companies were acquiring other companies and inheriting their data architecture. So, you know, despite being the industry leader for 40 years, not one of their customers truly had everything in one place. So I think definitely history has proven that to be a lie. >>So Richard, from a practitioner's point of view, you know, what, what are your thoughts? I mean, there, there's a lot of pressure to cut cost, keep things centralized, you know, serve the business as best as possible from that standpoint. What, what is your experience show? >>Yeah, I mean, I think I would echo Justin's experience really that we, as a business have grown up through acquisition, through storing data in different places sometimes to do information governance in different ways to store data in, in a platform that's close to data experts, people who really understand healthcare data from pharmacies or from, from doctors. And so, although if you were starting from a Greenfield site and you were building something brand new, you might be able to centralize all the data and all of the tooling and teams in one place. The reality is that that businesses just don't grow up like that. And, and it's just really impossible to get that academic perfection of, of storing everything in one place. >>Y you know, Theresa, I feel like Sarbanes Oxley kinda saved the data warehouse, you know, right. You actually did have to have a single version of the truth for certain financial data, but really for those, some of those other use cases, I, I mentioned, I, I do feel like the industry has kinda let us down. What's your take on this? Where does it make sense to have that sort of centralized approach versus where does it make sense to maybe decentralized? >>I, I think you gotta have centralized governance, right? So from the central team, for things like star Oxley, for things like security for certainly very core data sets, having a centralized set of roles, responsibilities to really QA, right. To serve as a design authority for your entire data estate, just like you might with security, but how it's implemented has to be distributed. Otherwise you're not gonna be able to scale. Right? So being able to have different parts of the business really make the right data investments for their needs. And then ultimately you're gonna collaborate with your partners. So partners that are not within the company, right. External partners, we're gonna see a lot more data sharing and model creation. And so you're definitely going to be decentralized. >>So, you know, Justin, you guys last, geez, I think it was about a year ago, had a session on, on data mesh. It was a great program. You invited Jamma, Dani, of course, she's the creator of the data mesh. And her one of our fundamental premises is that you've got this hyper specialized team that you've gotta go through. And if you want anything, but at the same time, these, these individuals actually become a bottleneck, even though they're some of the most talented people in the organization. So I guess question for you, Richard, how do you deal with that? Do you, do you organize so that there are a few sort of rock stars that, that, you know, build cubes and, and the like, and, and, and, or have you had any success in sort of decentralizing with, you know, your, your constituencies, that data model? >>Yeah. So, so we absolutely have got rockstar, data scientists and data guardians. If you like people who understand what it means to use this data, particularly as the data that we use at emos is very private it's healthcare information. And some of the, the rules and regulations around using the data are very complex and, and strict. So we have to have people who understand the usage of the data, then people who understand how to build models, how to process the data effectively. And you can think of them like consultants to the wider business, because a pharmacist might not understand how to structure a SQL query, but they do understand how they want to process medication information to improve patient lives. And so that becomes a, a consulting type experience from a, a set of rock stars to help a, a more decentralized business who needs to, to understand the data and to generate some valuable output. >>Justin, what do you say to a, to a customer or prospect that says, look, Justin, I'm gonna, I got a centralized team and that's the most cost effective way to serve the business. Otherwise I got, I got duplication. What do you say to that? >>Well, I, I would argue it's probably not the most cost effective and, and the reason being really twofold. I think, first of all, when you are deploying a enterprise data warehouse model, the, the data warehouse itself is very expensive, generally speaking. And so you're putting all of your most valuable data in the hands of one vendor who now has tremendous leverage over you, you know, for many, many years to come. I think that's the story at Oracle or Terra data or other proprietary database systems. But the other aspect I think is that the reality is those central data warehouse teams is as much as they are experts in the technology. They don't necessarily understand the data itself. And this is one of the core tenants of data mash that that jam writes about is this idea of the domain owners actually know the data the best. >>And so by, you know, not only acknowledging that data is generally decentralized and to your earlier point about SAR, brain Oxley, maybe saving the data warehouse, I would argue maybe GDPR and data sovereignty will destroy it because data has to be decentralized for, for those laws to be compliant. But I think the reality is, you know, the data mesh model basically says, data's decentralized, and we're gonna turn that into an asset rather than a liability. And we're gonna turn that into an asset by empowering the people that know the data, the best to participate in the process of, you know, curating and creating data products for, for consumption. So I think when you think about it, that way, you're going to get higher quality data and faster time to insight, which is ultimately going to drive more revenue for your business and reduce costs. So I think that that's the way I see the two, the two models comparing and contrasting. >>So do you think the demise of the data warehouse is inevitable? I mean, I mean, you know, there Theresa you work with a lot of clients, they're not just gonna rip and replace their existing infrastructure. Maybe they're gonna build on top of it, but what does that mean? Does that mean the E D w just becomes, you know, less and less valuable over time, or it's maybe just isolated to specific use cases. What's your take on that? >>Listen, I still would love all my data within a data warehouse would love it. Mastered would love it owned by essential team. Right? I think that's still what I would love to have. That's just not the reality, right? The investment to actually migrate and keep that up to date. I would say it's a losing battle. Like we've been trying to do it for a long time. Nobody has the budgets and then data changes, right? There's gonna be a new technology. That's gonna emerge that we're gonna wanna tap into. There's going to be not enough investment to bring all the legacy, but still very useful systems into that centralized view. So you keep the data warehouse. I think it's a very, very valuable, very high performance tool for what it's there for, but you could have this, you know, new mesh layer that still takes advantage of the things. I mentioned, the data products in the systems that are meaningful today and the data products that actually might span a number of systems, maybe either those that either source systems for the domains that know it best, or the consumer based systems and products that need to be packaged in a way that be really meaningful for that end user, right? Each of those are useful for a different part of the business and making sure that the mesh actually allows you to use all of them. >>So, Richard, let me ask you, you take, take Gemma's principles back to those. You got to, you know, domain ownership and, and, and data as product. Okay, great. Sounds good. But it creates what I would argue are two, you know, challenges, self-serve infrastructure let's park that for a second. And then in your industry, the one of the high, most regulated, most sensitive computational governance, how do you automate and ensure federated governance in that mesh model that Theresa was just talking about? >>Well, it absolutely depends on some of the tooling and processes that you put in place around those tools to be, to centralize the security and the governance of the data. And I think, although a data warehouse makes that very simple, cause it's a single tool, it's not impossible with some of the data mesh technologies that are available. And so what we've done at emus is we have a single security layer that sits on top of our data match, which means that no matter which user is accessing, which data source, we go through a well audited well understood security layer. That means that we know exactly who's got access to which data field, which data tables. And then everything that they do is, is audited in a very kind of standard way, regardless of the underlying data storage technology. So for me, although storing the data in one place might not be possible understanding where your source of truth is and securing that in a common way is still a valuable approach and you can do it without having to bring all that data into a single bucket so that it's all in one place. And, and so having done that and investing quite heavily in making that possible has paid dividends in terms of giving wider access to the platform and ensuring that only data that's available under GDPR and other regulations is being used by, by the data users. >>Yeah. So Justin, I mean, Democrat, we always talk about data democratization and you know, up until recently, they really haven't been line of sight as to how to get there. But do you have anything to add to this because you're essentially taking, you know, do an analytic queries and with data that's all dispersed all over the, how are you seeing your customers handle this, this challenge? >>Yeah. I mean, I think data products is a really interesting aspect of the answer to that. It allows you to, again, leverage the data domain owners, people know the data, the best to, to create, you know, data as a product ultimately to be consumed. And we try to represent that in our product as effectively a almost eCommerce like experience where you go and discover and look for the data products that have been created in your organization. And then you can start to consume them as, as you'd like. And so really trying to build on that notion of, you know, data democratization and self-service, and making it very easy to discover and, and start to use with whatever BI tool you, you may like, or even just running, you know, SQL queries yourself, >>Okay. G guys grab a sip of water. After this short break, we'll be back to debate whether proprietary or open platforms are the best path to the future of data excellence, keep it right there. >>Your company has more data than ever, and more people trying to understand it, but there's a problem. Your data is stored across multiple systems. It's hard to access and that delays analytics and ultimately decisions. The old method of moving all of your data into a single source of truth is slow and definitely not built for the volume of data we have today or where we are headed while your data engineers spent over half their time, moving data, your analysts and data scientists are left, waiting, feeling frustrated, unproductive, and unable to move the needle for your business. But what if you could spend less time moving or copying data? What if your data consumers could analyze all your data quickly? >>Starburst helps your teams run fast queries on any data source. We help you create a single point of access to your data, no matter where it's stored. And we support high concurrency, we solve for speed and scale, whether it's fast, SQL queries on your data lake or faster queries across multiple data sets, Starburst helps your teams run analytics anywhere you can't afford to wait for data to be available. Your team has questions that need answers. Now with Starburst, the wait is over. You'll have faster access to data with enterprise level security, easy connectivity, and 24 7 support from experts, organizations like Zolando Comcast and FINRA rely on Starburst to move their businesses forward. Contact our Trino experts to get started. >>We're back with Jess Borgman of Starburst and Richard Jarvis of EVAs health. Okay, we're gonna get to lie. Number two, and that is this an open source based platform cannot give you the performance and control that you can get with a proprietary system. Is that a lie? Justin, the enterprise data warehouse has been pretty dominant and has evolved and matured. Its stack has mature over the years. Why is it not the default platform for data? >>Yeah, well, I think that's become a lie over time. So I, I think, you know, if we go back 10 or 12 years ago with the advent of the first data lake really around Hudu, that probably was true that you couldn't get the performance that you needed to run fast, interactive, SQL queries in a data lake. Now a lot's changed in 10 or 12 years. I remember in the very early days, people would say, you you'll never get performance because you need to be column there. You need to store data in a column format. And then, you know, column formats we're introduced to, to data apes, you have Parque ORC file in aro that were created to ultimately deliver performance out of that. So, okay. We got, you know, largely over the performance hurdle, you know, more recently people will say, well, you don't have the ability to do updates and deletes like a traditional data warehouse. >>And now we've got the creation of new data formats, again like iceberg and Delta and Hodi that do allow for updates and delete. So I think the data lake has continued to mature. And I remember a, a quote from, you know, Kurt Monash many years ago where he said, you know, know it takes six or seven years to build a functional database. I think that's that's right. And now we've had almost a decade go by. So, you know, these technologies have matured to really deliver very, very close to the same level performance and functionality of, of cloud data warehouses. So I think the, the reality is that's become a line and now we have large giant hyperscale internet companies that, you know, don't have the traditional data warehouse at all. They do all of their analytics in a data lake. So I think we've, we've proven that it's very much possible today. >>Thank you for that. And so Richard, talk about your perspective as a practitioner in terms of what open brings you versus, I mean, look closed is it's open as a moving target. I remember Unix used to be open systems and so it's, it is an evolving, you know, spectrum, but, but from your perspective, what does open give you that you can't get from a proprietary system where you are fearful of in a proprietary system? >>I, I suppose for me open buys us the ability to be unsure about the future, because one thing that's always true about technology is it evolves in a, a direction, slightly different to what people expect. And what you don't want to end up is done is backed itself into a corner that then prevents it from innovating. So if you have chosen a technology and you've stored trillions of records in that technology and suddenly a new way of processing or machine learning comes out, you wanna be able to take advantage and your competitive edge might depend upon it. And so I suppose for us, we acknowledge that we don't have perfect vision of what the future might be. And so by backing open storage technologies, we can apply a number of different technologies to the processing of that data. And that gives us the ability to remain relevant, innovate on our data storage. And we have bought our way out of the, any performance concerns because we can use cloud scale infrastructure to scale up and scale down as we need. And so we don't have the concerns that we don't have enough hardware today to process what we want to do, want to achieve. We can just scale up when we need it and scale back down. So open source has really allowed us to maintain the being at the cutting edge. >>So Jess, let me play devil's advocate here a little bit, and I've talked to Shaak about this and you know, obviously her vision is there's an open source that, that the data meshes open source, an open source tooling, and it's not a proprietary, you know, you're not gonna buy a data mesh. You're gonna build it with, with open source toolings and, and vendors like you are gonna support it, but to come back to sort of today, you can get to market with a proprietary solution faster. I'm gonna make that statement. You tell me if it's a lie and then you can say, okay, we support Apache iceberg. We're gonna support open source tooling, take a company like VMware, not really in the data business, but how, the way they embraced Kubernetes and, and you know, every new open source thing that comes along, they say, we do that too. Why can't proprietary systems do that and be as effective? >>Yeah, well, I think at least with the, within the data landscape saying that you can access open data formats like iceberg or, or others is, is a bit dis disingenuous because really what you're selling to your customer is a certain degree of performance, a certain SLA, and you know, those cloud data warehouses that can reach beyond their own proprietary storage drop all the performance that they were able to provide. So it is, it reminds me kind of, of, again, going back 10 or 12 years ago when everybody had a connector to Haddo and that they thought that was the solution, right? But the reality was, you know, a connector was not the same as running workloads in Haddo back then. And I think similarly, you know, being able to connect to an external table that lives in an open data format, you know, you're, you're not going to give it the performance that your customers are accustomed to. And at the end of the day, they're always going to be predisposed. They're always going to be incentivized to get that data ingested into the data warehouse, cuz that's where they have control. And you know, the bottom line is the database industry has really been built around vendor lockin. I mean, from the start, how, how many people love Oracle today, but our customers, nonetheless, I think, you know, lockin is, is, is part of this industry. And I think that's really what we're trying to change with open data formats. >>Well, that's interesting reminded when I, you know, I see the, the gas price, the tees or gas price I, I drive up and then I say, oh, that's the cash price credit card. I gotta pay 20 cents more, but okay. But so the, the argument then, so let me, let me come back to you, Justin. So what's wrong with saying, Hey, we support open data formats, but yeah, you're gonna get better performance if you, if you keep it into our closed system, are you saying that long term that's gonna come back and bite you cuz you're gonna end up, you mentioned Oracle, you mentioned Teradata. Yeah. That's by, by implication, you're saying that's where snowflake customers are headed. >>Yeah, absolutely. I think this is a movie that, you know, we've all seen before. At least those of us who've been in the industry long enough to, to see this movie play over a couple times. So I do think that's the future. And I think, you know, I loved what Richard said. I actually wrote it down. Cause I thought it was an amazing quote. He said, it buys us the ability to be unsure of the future. Th that that pretty much says it all the, the future is unknowable and the reality is using open data formats. You remain interoperable with any technology you want to utilize. If you want to use spark to train a machine learning model and you want to use Starbust to query via sequel, that's totally cool. They can both work off the same exact, you know, data, data sets by contrast, if you're, you know, focused on a proprietary model, then you're kind of locked in again to that model. I think the same applies to data, sharing to data products, to a wide variety of, of aspects of the data landscape that a proprietary approach kind of closes you in and locks you in. >>So I, I would say this Richard, I'd love to get your thoughts on it. Cause I talked to a lot of Oracle customers, not as many te data customers, but, but a lot of Oracle customers and they, you know, they'll admit, yeah, you know, they're jamming us on price and the license cost they give, but we do get value out of it. And so my question to you, Richard, is, is do the, let's call it data warehouse systems or the proprietary systems. Are they gonna deliver a greater ROI sooner? And is that in allure of, of that customers, you know, are attracted to, or can open platforms deliver as fast in ROI? >>I think the answer to that is it can depend a bit. It depends on your businesses skillset. So we are lucky that we have a number of proprietary teams that work in databases that provide our operational data capability. And we have teams of analytics and big data experts who can work with open data sets and open data formats. And so for those different teams, they can get to an ROI more quickly with different technologies for the business though, we can't do better for our operational data stores than proprietary databases. Today we can back off very tight SLAs to them. We can demonstrate reliability from millions of hours of those databases being run at enterprise scale, but for an analytics workload where increasing our business is growing in that direction, we can't do better than open data formats with cloud-based data mesh type technologies. And so it's not a simple answer. That one will always be the right answer for our business. We definitely have times when proprietary databases provide a capability that we couldn't easily represent or replicate with open technologies. >>Yeah. Richard, stay with you. You mentioned, you know, you know, some things before that, that strike me, you know, the data brick snowflake, you know, thing is, oh, is a lot of fun for analysts like me. You've got data bricks coming at it. Richard, you mentioned you have a lot of rockstar, data engineers, data bricks coming at it from a data engineering heritage. You get snowflake coming at it from an analytics heritage. Those two worlds are, are colliding people like PJI Mohan said, you know what? I think it's actually harder to play in the data engineering. So I E it's easier to for data engineering world to go into the analytics world versus the reverse, but thinking about up and coming engineers and developers preparing for this future of data engineering and data analytics, how, how should they be thinking about the future? What, what's your advice to those young people? >>So I think I'd probably fall back on general programming skill sets. So the advice that I saw years ago was if you have open source technologies, the pythons and Javas on your CV, you commander 20% pay, hike over people who can only do proprietary programming languages. And I think that's true of data technologies as well. And from a business point of view, that makes sense. I'd rather spend the money that I save on proprietary licenses on better engineers, because they can provide more value to the business that can innovate us beyond our competitors. So I think I would my advice to people who are starting here or trying to build teams to capitalize on data assets is begin with open license, free capabilities, because they're very cheap to experiment with. And they generate a lot of interest from people who want to join you as a business. And you can make them very successful early, early doors with, with your analytics journey. >>It's interesting. Again, analysts like myself, we do a lot of TCO work and have over the last 20 plus years. And in world of Oracle, you know, normally it's the staff, that's the biggest nut in total cost of ownership, not an Oracle. It's the it's the license cost is by far the biggest component in the, in the blame pie. All right, Justin, help us close out this segment. We've been talking about this sort of data mesh open, closed snowflake data bricks. Where does Starburst sort of as this engine for the data lake data lake house, the data warehouse fit in this, in this world? >>Yeah. So our view on how the future ultimately unfolds is we think that data lakes will be a natural center of gravity for a lot of the reasons that we described open data formats, lowest total cost of ownership, because you get to choose the cheapest storage available to you. Maybe that's S3 or Azure data lake storage, or Google cloud storage, or maybe it's on-prem object storage that you bought at a, at a really good price. So ultimately storing a lot of data in a deal lake makes a lot of sense, but I think what makes our perspective unique is we still don't think you're gonna get everything there either. We think that basically centralization of all your data assets is just an impossible endeavor. And so you wanna be able to access data that lives outside of the lake as well. So we kind of think of the lake as maybe the biggest place by volume in terms of how much data you have, but to, to have comprehensive analytics and to truly understand your business and understand it holistically, you need to be able to go access other data sources as well. And so that's the role that we wanna play is to be a single point of access for our customers, provide the right level of fine grained access controls so that the right people have access to the right data and ultimately make it easy to discover and consume via, you know, the creation of data products as well. >>Great. Okay. Thanks guys. Right after this quick break, we're gonna be back to debate whether the cloud data model that we see emerging and the so-called modern data stack is really modern, or is it the same wine new bottle? When it comes to data architectures, you're watching the cube, the leader in enterprise and emerging tech coverage. >>Your data is capable of producing incredible results, but data consumers are often left in the dark without fast access to the data they need. Starers makes your data visible from wherever it lives. Your company is acquiring more data in more places, more rapidly than ever to rely solely on a data centralization strategy. Whether it's in a lake or a warehouse is unrealistic. A single source of truth approach is no longer viable, but disconnected data silos are often left untapped. We need a new approach. One that embraces distributed data. One that enables fast and secure access to any of your data from anywhere with Starburst, you'll have the fastest query engine for the data lake that allows you to connect and analyze your disparate data sources no matter where they live Starburst provides the foundational technology required for you to build towards the vision of a decentralized data mesh Starburst enterprise and Starburst galaxy offer enterprise ready, connectivity, interoperability, and security features for multiple regions, multiple clouds and everchanging global regulatory requirements. The data is yours. And with Starburst, you can perform analytics anywhere in light of your world. >>Okay. We're back with Justin Boardman. CEO of Starbust Richard Jarvis is the CTO of EMI health and Theresa tongue is the cloud first technologist from Accenture. We're on July number three. And that is the claim that today's modern data stack is actually modern. So I guess that's the lie it's it is it's is that it's not modern. Justin, what do you say? >>Yeah. I mean, I think new isn't modern, right? I think it's the, it's the new data stack. It's the cloud data stack, but that doesn't necessarily mean it's modern. I think a lot of the components actually are exactly the same as what we've had for 40 years, rather than Terra data. You have snowflake rather than Informatica you have five trend. So it's the same general stack, just, you know, a cloud version of it. And I think a lot of the challenges that it plagued us for 40 years still maintain. >>So lemme come back to you just, but okay. But, but there are differences, right? I mean, you can scale, you can throw resources at the problem. You can separate compute from storage. You really, you know, there's a lot of money being thrown at that by venture capitalists and snowflake, you mentioned it's competitors. So that's different. Is it not, is that not at least an aspect of, of modern dial it up, dial it down. So what, what do you say to that? >>Well, it, it is, it's certainly taking, you know, what the cloud offers and taking advantage of that, but it's important to note that the cloud data warehouses out there are really just separating their compute from their storage. So it's allowing them to scale up and down, but your data still stored in a proprietary format. You're still locked in. You still have to ingest the data to get it even prepared for analysis. So a lot of the same sort of structural constraints that exist with the old enterprise data warehouse model OnPrem still exist just yes, a little bit more elastic now because the cloud offers that. >>So Theresa, let me go to you cuz you have cloud first in your, in your, your title. So what's what say you to this conversation? >>Well, even the cloud providers are looking towards more of a cloud continuum, right? So the centralized cloud, as we know it, maybe data lake data warehouse in the central place, that's not even how the cloud providers are looking at it. They have news query services. Every provider has one that really expands those queries to be beyond a single location. And if we look at a lot of where our, the future goes, right, that that's gonna very much fall the same thing. There was gonna be more edge. There's gonna be more on premise because of data sovereignty, data gravity, because you're working with different parts of the business that have already made major cloud investments in different cloud providers. Right? So there's a lot of reasons why the modern, I guess, the next modern generation of the data staff needs to be much more federated. >>Okay. So Richard, how do you deal with this? You you've obviously got, you know, the technical debt, the existing infrastructure it's on the books. You don't wanna just throw it out. A lot of, lot of conversation about modernizing applications, which a lot of times is a, you know, a microservices layer on top of leg legacy apps. How do you think about the modern data stack? >>Well, I think probably the first thing to say is that the stack really has to include the processes and people around the data as well is all well and good changing the technology. But if you don't modernize how people use that technology, then you're not going to be able to, to scale because just cuz you can scale CPU and storage doesn't mean you can get more people to use your data, to generate you more, more value for the business. And so what we've been looking at is really changing in very much aligned to data products and, and data mesh. How do you enable more people to consume the service and have the stack respond in a way that keeps costs low? Because that's important for our customers consuming this data, but also allows people to occasionally run enormous queries and then tick along with smaller ones when required. And it's a good job we did because during COVID all of a sudden we had enormous pressures on our data platform to answer really important life threatening queries. And if we couldn't scale both our data stack and our teams, we wouldn't have been able to answer those as quickly as we had. So I think the stack needs to support a scalable business, not just the technology itself. >>Well thank you for that. So Justin let's, let's try to break down what the critical aspects are of the modern data stack. So you think about the past, you know, five, seven years cloud obviously has given a different pricing model. De-risked experimentation, you know that we talked about the ability to scale up scale down, but it's, I'm, I'm taking away that that's not enough based on what Richard just said. The modern data stack has to serve the business and enable the business to build data products. I, I buy that. I'm a big fan of the data mesh concepts, even though we're early days. So what are the critical aspects if you had to think about, you know, paying, maybe putting some guardrails and definitions around the modern data stack, what does that look like? What are some of the attributes and, and principles there >>Of, of how it should look like or, or how >>It's yeah. What it should be. >>Yeah. Yeah. Well, I think, you know, in, in Theresa mentioned this in, in a previous segment about the data warehouse is not necessarily going to disappear. It just becomes one node, one element of the overall data mesh. And I, I certainly agree with that. So by no means, are we suggesting that, you know, snowflake or Redshift or whatever cloud data warehouse you may be using is going to disappear, but it's, it's not going to become the end all be all. It's not the, the central single source of truth. And I think that's the paradigm shift that needs to occur. And I think it's also worth noting that those who were the early adopters of the modern data stack were primarily digital, native born in the cloud young companies who had the benefit of, of idealism. They had the benefit of it was starting with a clean slate that does not reflect the vast majority of enterprises. >>And even those companies, as they grow up mature out of that ideal state, they go buy a business. Now they've got something on another cloud provider that has a different data stack and they have to deal with that heterogeneity that is just change and change is a part of life. And so I think there is an element here that is almost philosophical. It's like, do you believe in an absolute ideal where I can just fit everything into one place or do I believe in reality? And I think the far more pragmatic approach is really what data mesh represents. So to answer your question directly, I think it's adding, you know, the ability to access data that lives outside of the data warehouse, maybe living in open data formats in a data lake or accessing operational systems as well. Maybe you want to directly access data that lives in an Oracle database or a Mongo database or, or what have you. So creating that flexibility to really Futureproof yourself from the inevitable change that you will, you won't encounter over time. >>So thank you. So there, based on what Justin just said, I, my takeaway there is it's inclusive, whether it's a data Mar data hub, data lake data warehouse, it's a, just a node on the mesh. Okay. I get that. Does that include there on Preem data? O obviously it has to, what are you seeing in terms of the ability to, to take that data mesh concept on Preem? I mean, most implementations I've seen in data mesh, frankly really aren't, you know, adhering to the philosophy. They're maybe, maybe it's data lake and maybe it's using glue. You look at what JPMC is doing. Hello, fresh, a lot of stuff happening on the AWS cloud in that, you know, closed stack, if you will. What's the answer to that Theresa? >>I mean, I, I think it's a killer case for data. Me, the fact that you have valuable data sources, OnPrem, and then yet you still wanna modernize and take the best of cloud cloud is still, like we mentioned, there's a lot of great reasons for it around the economics and the way ability to tap into the innovation that the cloud providers are giving around data and AI architecture. It's an easy button. So the mesh allows you to have the best of both worlds. You can start using the data products on-prem or in the existing systems that are working already. It's meaningful for the business. At the same time, you can modernize the ones that make business sense because it needs better performance. It needs, you know, something that is, is cheaper or, or maybe just tap into better analytics to get better insights, right? So you're gonna be able to stretch and really have the best of both worlds. That, again, going back to Richard's point, that is meaningful by the business. Not everything has to have that one size fits all set a tool. >>Okay. Thank you. So Richard, you know, talking about data as product, wonder if we could give us your perspectives here, what are the advantages of treating data as a product? What, what role do data products have in the modern data stack? We talk about monetizing data. What are your thoughts on data products? >>So for us, one of the most important data products that we've been creating is taking data that is healthcare data across a wide variety of different settings. So information about patients' demographics about their, their treatment, about their medications and so on, and taking that into a standards format that can be utilized by a wide variety of different researchers because misinterpreting that data or having the data not presented in the way that the user is expecting means that you generate the wrong insight. And in any business, that's clearly not a desirable outcome, but when that insight is so critical, as it might be in healthcare or some security settings, you really have to have gone to the trouble of understanding the data, presenting it in a format that everyone can clearly agree on. And then letting people consume in a very structured, managed way, even if that data comes from a variety of different sources in, in, in the first place. And so our data product journey has really begun by standardizing data across a number of different silos through the data mesh. So we can present out both internally and through the right governance externally to, to researchers. >>So that data product through whatever APIs is, is accessible, it's discoverable, but it's obviously gotta be governed as well. You mentioned you, you appropriately provided to internally. Yeah. But also, you know, external folks as well. So the, so you've, you've architected that capability today >>We have, and because the data is standard, it can generate value much more quickly and we can be sure of the security and, and, and value that that's providing because the data product isn't just about formatting the data into the correct tables, it's understanding what it means to redact the data or to remove certain rows from it or to interpret what a date actually means. Is it the start of the contract or the start of the treatment or the date of birth of a patient? These things can be lost in the data storage without having the proper product management around the data to say in a very clear business context, what does this data mean? And what does it mean to process this data for a particular use case? >>Yeah, it makes sense. It's got the context. If the, if the domains own the data, you, you gotta cut through a lot of the, the, the centralized teams, the technical teams that, that data agnostic, they don't really have that context. All right. Let's send Justin, how does Starburst fit into this modern data stack? Bring us home. >>Yeah. So I think for us, it's really providing our customers with, you know, the flexibility to operate and analyze data that lives in a wide variety of different systems. Ultimately giving them that optionality, you know, and optionality provides the ability to reduce costs, store more in a data lake rather than data warehouse. It provides the ability for the fastest time to insight to access the data directly where it lives. And ultimately with this concept of data products that we've now, you know, incorporated into our offering as well, you can really create and, and curate, you know, data as a product to be shared and consumed. So we're trying to help enable the data mesh, you know, model and make that an appropriate compliment to, you know, the, the, the modern data stack that people have today. >>Excellent. Hey, I wanna thank Justin Theresa and Richard for joining us today. You guys are great. I big believers in the, in the data mesh concept, and I think, you know, we're seeing the future of data architecture. So thank you. Now, remember, all these conversations are gonna be available on the cube.net for on-demand viewing. You can also go to starburst.io. They have some great content on the website and they host some really thought provoking interviews and, and, and they have awesome resources, lots of data mesh conversations over there, and really good stuff in, in the resource section. So check that out. Thanks for watching the data doesn't lie or does it made possible by Starburst data? This is Dave Valante for the cube, and we'll see you next time. >>The explosion of data sources has forced organizations to modernize their systems and architecture and come to terms with one size does not fit all for data management today. Your teams are constantly moving and copying data, which requires time management. And in some cases, double paying for compute resources. Instead, what if you could access all your data anywhere using the BI tools and SQL skills your users already have. And what if this also included enterprise security and fast performance with Starburst enterprise, you can provide your data consumers with a single point of secure access to all of your data, no matter where it lives with features like strict, fine grained, access control, end to end data encryption and data masking Starburst meets the security standards of the largest companies. Starburst enterprise can easily be deployed anywhere and managed with insights where data teams holistically view their clusters operation and query execution. So they can reach meaningful business decisions faster, all this with the support of the largest team of Trino experts in the world, delivering fully tested stable releases and available to support you 24 7 to unlock the value in all of your data. You need a solution that easily fits with what you have today and can adapt to your architecture. Tomorrow. Starbust enterprise gives you the fastest path from big data to better decisions, cuz your team can't afford to wait. Trino was created to empower analytics anywhere and Starburst enterprise was created to give you the enterprise grade performance, connectivity, security management, and support your company needs organizations like Zolando Comcast and FINRA rely on Starburst to move their businesses forward. Contact us to get started.

>>In 2011, early Facebook employee and Cloudera co-founder Jeff Ocker famously said the best minds of my generation are thinking about how to get people to click on ads. And that sucks. Let's face it more than a decade later organizations continue to be frustrated with how difficult it is to get value from data and build a truly agile data-driven enterprise. What does that even mean? You ask? Well, it means that everyone in the organization has the data they need when they need it. In a context that's relevant to advance the mission of an organization. Now that could mean cutting cost could mean increasing profits, driving productivity, saving lives, accelerating drug discovery, making better diagnoses, solving, supply chain problems, predicting weather disasters, simplifying processes, and thousands of other examples where data can completely transform people's lives beyond manipulating internet users to behave a certain way. We've heard the prognostications about the possibilities of data before and in fairness we've made progress, but the hard truth is the original promises of master data management, enterprise data, warehouses, data marts, data hubs, and yes, even data lakes were broken and left us wanting from more welcome to the data doesn't lie, or doesn't a series of conversations produced by the cube and made possible by Starburst data. >>I'm your host, Dave Lanta and joining me today are three industry experts. Justin Borgman is this co-founder and CEO of Starburst. Richard Jarvis is the CTO at EMI health and Theresa tongue is cloud first technologist at Accenture. Today we're gonna have a candid discussion that will expose the unfulfilled and yes, broken promises of a data past we'll expose data lies, big lies, little lies, white lies, and hidden truths. And we'll challenge, age old data conventions and bust some data myths. We're debating questions like is the demise of a single source of truth. Inevitable will the data warehouse ever have featured parody with the data lake or vice versa is the so-called modern data stack, simply centralization in the cloud, AKA the old guards model in new cloud close. How can organizations rethink their data architectures and regimes to realize the true promises of data can and will and open ecosystem deliver on these promises in our lifetimes, we're spanning much of the Western world today. Richard is in the UK. Teresa is on the west coast and Justin is in Massachusetts with me. I'm in the cube studios about 30 miles outside of Boston folks. Welcome to the program. Thanks for coming on. Thanks for having us. Let's get right into it. You're very welcome. Now here's the first lie. The most effective data architecture is one that is centralized with a team of data specialists serving various lines of business. What do you think Justin? >>Yeah, definitely a lie. My first startup was a company called hit adapt, which was an early SQL engine for hit that was acquired by Teradata. And when I got to Teradata, of course, Teradata is the pioneer of that central enterprise data warehouse model. One of the things that I found fascinating was that not one of their customers had actually lived up to that vision of centralizing all of their data into one place. They all had data silos. They all had data in different systems. They had data on prem data in the cloud. You know, those companies were acquiring other companies and inheriting their data architecture. So, you know, despite being the industry leader for 40 years, not one of their customers truly had everything in one place. So I think definitely history has proven that to be a lie. >>So Richard, from a practitioner's point of view, you know, what, what are your thoughts? I mean, there, there's a lot of pressure to cut cost, keep things centralized, you know, serve the business as best as possible from that standpoint. What, what is your experience show? >>Yeah, I mean, I think I would echo Justin's experience really that we, as a business have grown up through acquisition, through storing data in different places sometimes to do information governance in different ways to store data in, in a platform that's close to data experts, people who really understand healthcare data from pharmacies or from, from doctors. And so, although if you were starting from a Greenfield site and you were building something brand new, you might be able to centralize all the data and all of the tooling and teams in one place. The reality is that that businesses just don't grow up like that. And, and it's just really impossible to get that academic perfection of, of storing everything in one place. >>Y you know, Theresa, I feel like Sarbanes Oxley kinda saved the data warehouse, you know, right. You actually did have to have a single version of the truth for certain financial data, but really for those, some of those other use cases, I, I mentioned, I, I do feel like the industry has kinda let us down. What's your take on this? Where does it make sense to have that sort of centralized approach versus where does it make sense to maybe decentralized? >>I, I think you gotta have centralized governance, right? So from the central team, for things like star Oxley, for things like security for certainly very core data sets, having a centralized set of roles, responsibilities to really QA, right. To serve as a design authority for your entire data estate, just like you might with security, but how it's implemented has to be distributed. Otherwise you're not gonna be able to scale. Right? So being able to have different parts of the business really make the right data investments for their needs. And then ultimately you're gonna collaborate with your partners. So partners that are not within the company, right. External partners, we're gonna see a lot more data sharing and model creation. And so you're definitely going to be decentralized. >>So, you know, Justin, you guys last, geez, I think it was about a year ago, had a session on, on data mesh. It was a great program. You invited Jamma, Dani, of course, she's the creator of the data mesh. And her one of our fundamental premises is that you've got this hyper specialized team that you've gotta go through. And if you want anything, but at the same time, these, these individuals actually become a bottleneck, even though they're some of the most talented people in the organization. So I guess question for you, Richard, how do you deal with that? Do you, do you organize so that there are a few sort of rock stars that, that, you know, build cubes and, and the like, and, and, and, or have you had any success in sort of decentralizing with, you know, your, your constituencies, that data model? >>Yeah. So, so we absolutely have got rockstar, data scientists and data guardians. If you like people who understand what it means to use this data, particularly as the data that we use at emos is very private it's healthcare information. And some of the, the rules and regulations around using the data are very complex and, and strict. So we have to have people who understand the usage of the data, then people who understand how to build models, how to process the data effectively. And you can think of them like consultants to the wider business, because a pharmacist might not understand how to structure a SQL query, but they do understand how they want to process medication information to improve patient lives. And so that becomes a, a consulting type experience from a, a set of rock stars to help a, a more decentralized business who needs to, to understand the data and to generate some valuable output. >>Justin, what do you say to a, to a customer or prospect that says, look, Justin, I'm gonna, I got a centralized team and that's the most cost effective way to serve the business. Otherwise I got, I got duplication. What do you say to that? >>Well, I, I would argue it's probably not the most cost effective and, and the reason being really twofold. I think, first of all, when you are deploying a enterprise data warehouse model, the, the data warehouse itself is very expensive, generally speaking. And so you're putting all of your most valuable data in the hands of one vendor who now has tremendous leverage over you, you know, for many, many years to come. I think that's the story at Oracle or Terra data or other proprietary database systems. But the other aspect I think is that the reality is those central data warehouse teams is as much as they are experts in the technology. They don't necessarily understand the data itself. And this is one of the core tenants of data mash that that jam writes about is this idea of the domain owners actually know the data the best. >>And so by, you know, not only acknowledging that data is generally decentralized and to your earlier point about SAR, brain Oxley, maybe saving the data warehouse, I would argue maybe GDPR and data sovereignty will destroy it because data has to be decentralized for, for those laws to be compliant. But I think the reality is, you know, the data mesh model basically says, data's decentralized, and we're gonna turn that into an asset rather than a liability. And we're gonna turn that into an asset by empowering the people that know the data, the best to participate in the process of, you know, curating and creating data products for, for consumption. So I think when you think about it, that way, you're going to get higher quality data and faster time to insight, which is ultimately going to drive more revenue for your business and reduce costs. So I think that that's the way I see the two, the two models comparing and contrasting. >>So do you think the demise of the data warehouse is inevitable? I mean, I mean, you know, there Theresa you work with a lot of clients, they're not just gonna rip and replace their existing infrastructure. Maybe they're gonna build on top of it, but what does that mean? Does that mean the E D w just becomes, you know, less and less valuable over time, or it's maybe just isolated to specific use cases. What's your take on that? >>Listen, I still would love all my data within a data warehouse would love it. Mastered would love it owned by essential team. Right? I think that's still what I would love to have. That's just not the reality, right? The investment to actually migrate and keep that up to date. I would say it's a losing battle. Like we've been trying to do it for a long time. Nobody has the budgets and then data changes, right? There's gonna be a new technology. That's gonna emerge that we're gonna wanna tap into. There's going to be not enough investment to bring all the legacy, but still very useful systems into that centralized view. So you keep the data warehouse. I think it's a very, very valuable, very high performance tool for what it's there for, but you could have this, you know, new mesh layer that still takes advantage of the things. I mentioned, the data products in the systems that are meaningful today and the data products that actually might span a number of systems, maybe either those that either source systems for the domains that know it best, or the consumer based systems and products that need to be packaged in a way that be really meaningful for that end user, right? Each of those are useful for a different part of the business and making sure that the mesh actually allows you to use all of them. >>So, Richard, let me ask you, you take, take Gemma's principles back to those. You got to, you know, domain ownership and, and, and data as product. Okay, great. Sounds good. But it creates what I would argue are two, you know, challenges, self-serve infrastructure let's park that for a second. And then in your industry, the one of the high, most regulated, most sensitive computational governance, how do you automate and ensure federated governance in that mesh model that Theresa was just talking about? >>Well, it absolutely depends on some of the tooling and processes that you put in place around those tools to be, to centralize the security and the governance of the data. And I think, although a data warehouse makes that very simple, cause it's a single tool, it's not impossible with some of the data mesh technologies that are available. And so what we've done at emus is we have a single security layer that sits on top of our data match, which means that no matter which user is accessing, which data source, we go through a well audited well understood security layer. That means that we know exactly who's got access to which data field, which data tables. And then everything that they do is, is audited in a very kind of standard way, regardless of the underlying data storage technology. So for me, although storing the data in one place might not be possible understanding where your source of truth is and securing that in a common way is still a valuable approach and you can do it without having to bring all that data into a single bucket so that it's all in one place. And, and so having done that and investing quite heavily in making that possible has paid dividends in terms of giving wider access to the platform and ensuring that only data that's available under GDPR and other regulations is being used by, by the data users. >>Yeah. So Justin, I mean, Democrat, we always talk about data democratization and you know, up until recently, they really haven't been line of sight as to how to get there. But do you have anything to add to this because you're essentially taking, you know, do an analytic queries and with data that's all dispersed all over the, how are you seeing your customers handle this, this challenge? >>Yeah. I mean, I think data products is a really interesting aspect of the answer to that. It allows you to, again, leverage the data domain owners, people know the data, the best to, to create, you know, data as a product ultimately to be consumed. And we try to represent that in our product as effectively a almost eCommerce like experience where you go and discover and look for the data products that have been created in your organization. And then you can start to consume them as, as you'd like. And so really trying to build on that notion of, you know, data democratization and self-service, and making it very easy to discover and, and start to use with whatever BI tool you, you may like, or even just running, you know, SQL queries yourself, >>Okay. G guys grab a sip of water. After this short break, we'll be back to debate whether proprietary or open platforms are the best path to the future of data excellence, keep it right there. >>Your company has more data than ever, and more people trying to understand it, but there's a problem. Your data is stored across multiple systems. It's hard to access and that delays analytics and ultimately decisions. The old method of moving all of your data into a single source of truth is slow and definitely not built for the volume of data we have today or where we are headed while your data engineers spent over half their time, moving data, your analysts and data scientists are left, waiting, feeling frustrated, unproductive, and unable to move the needle for your business. But what if you could spend less time moving or copying data? What if your data consumers could analyze all your data quickly? >>Starburst helps your teams run fast queries on any data source. We help you create a single point of access to your data, no matter where it's stored. And we support high concurrency, we solve for speed and scale, whether it's fast, SQL queries on your data lake or faster queries across multiple data sets, Starburst helps your teams run analytics anywhere you can't afford to wait for data to be available. Your team has questions that need answers. Now with Starburst, the wait is over. You'll have faster access to data with enterprise level security, easy connectivity, and 24 7 support from experts, organizations like Zolando Comcast and FINRA rely on Starburst to move their businesses forward. Contact our Trino experts to get started. >>We're back with Jess Borgman of Starburst and Richard Jarvis of EVAs health. Okay, we're gonna get to lie. Number two, and that is this an open source based platform cannot give you the performance and control that you can get with a proprietary system. Is that a lie? Justin, the enterprise data warehouse has been pretty dominant and has evolved and matured. Its stack has mature over the years. Why is it not the default platform for data? >>Yeah, well, I think that's become a lie over time. So I, I think, you know, if we go back 10 or 12 years ago with the advent of the first data lake really around Hudu, that probably was true that you couldn't get the performance that you needed to run fast, interactive, SQL queries in a data lake. Now a lot's changed in 10 or 12 years. I remember in the very early days, people would say, you you'll never get performance because you need to be column there. You need to store data in a column format. And then, you know, column formats we're introduced to, to data apes, you have Parque ORC file in aro that were created to ultimately deliver performance out of that. So, okay. We got, you know, largely over the performance hurdle, you know, more recently people will say, well, you don't have the ability to do updates and deletes like a traditional data warehouse. >>And now we've got the creation of new data formats, again like iceberg and Delta and Hodi that do allow for updates and delete. So I think the data lake has continued to mature. And I remember a, a quote from, you know, Kurt Monash many years ago where he said, you know, know it takes six or seven years to build a functional database. I think that's that's right. And now we've had almost a decade go by. So, you know, these technologies have matured to really deliver very, very close to the same level performance and functionality of, of cloud data warehouses. So I think the, the reality is that's become a line and now we have large giant hyperscale internet companies that, you know, don't have the traditional data warehouse at all. They do all of their analytics in a data lake. So I think we've, we've proven that it's very much possible today. >>Thank you for that. And so Richard, talk about your perspective as a practitioner in terms of what open brings you versus, I mean, look closed is it's open as a moving target. I remember Unix used to be open systems and so it's, it is an evolving, you know, spectrum, but, but from your perspective, what does open give you that you can't get from a proprietary system where you are fearful of in a proprietary system? >>I, I suppose for me open buys us the ability to be unsure about the future, because one thing that's always true about technology is it evolves in a, a direction, slightly different to what people expect. And what you don't want to end up is done is backed itself into a corner that then prevents it from innovating. So if you have chosen a technology and you've stored trillions of records in that technology and suddenly a new way of processing or machine learning comes out, you wanna be able to take advantage and your competitive edge might depend upon it. And so I suppose for us, we acknowledge that we don't have perfect vision of what the future might be. And so by backing open storage technologies, we can apply a number of different technologies to the processing of that data. And that gives us the ability to remain relevant, innovate on our data storage. And we have bought our way out of the, any performance concerns because we can use cloud scale infrastructure to scale up and scale down as we need. And so we don't have the concerns that we don't have enough hardware today to process what we want to do, want to achieve. We can just scale up when we need it and scale back down. So open source has really allowed us to maintain the being at the cutting edge. >>So Jess, let me play devil's advocate here a little bit, and I've talked to Shaak about this and you know, obviously her vision is there's an open source that, that the data meshes open source, an open source tooling, and it's not a proprietary, you know, you're not gonna buy a data mesh. You're gonna build it with, with open source toolings and, and vendors like you are gonna support it, but to come back to sort of today, you can get to market with a proprietary solution faster. I'm gonna make that statement. You tell me if it's a lie and then you can say, okay, we support Apache iceberg. We're gonna support open source tooling, take a company like VMware, not really in the data business, but how, the way they embraced Kubernetes and, and you know, every new open source thing that comes along, they say, we do that too. Why can't proprietary systems do that and be as effective? >>Yeah, well, I think at least with the, within the data landscape saying that you can access open data formats like iceberg or, or others is, is a bit dis disingenuous because really what you're selling to your customer is a certain degree of performance, a certain SLA, and you know, those cloud data warehouses that can reach beyond their own proprietary storage drop all the performance that they were able to provide. So it is, it reminds me kind of, of, again, going back 10 or 12 years ago when everybody had a connector to Haddo and that they thought that was the solution, right? But the reality was, you know, a connector was not the same as running workloads in Haddo back then. And I think similarly, you know, being able to connect to an external table that lives in an open data format, you know, you're, you're not going to give it the performance that your customers are accustomed to. And at the end of the day, they're always going to be predisposed. They're always going to be incentivized to get that data ingested into the data warehouse, cuz that's where they have control. And you know, the bottom line is the database industry has really been built around vendor lockin. I mean, from the start, how, how many people love Oracle today, but our customers, nonetheless, I think, you know, lockin is, is, is part of this industry. And I think that's really what we're trying to change with open data formats. >>Well, that's interesting reminded when I, you know, I see the, the gas price, the tees or gas price I, I drive up and then I say, oh, that's the cash price credit card. I gotta pay 20 cents more, but okay. But so the, the argument then, so let me, let me come back to you, Justin. So what's wrong with saying, Hey, we support open data formats, but yeah, you're gonna get better performance if you, if you keep it into our closed system, are you saying that long term that's gonna come back and bite you cuz you're gonna end up, you mentioned Oracle, you mentioned Teradata. Yeah. That's by, by implication, you're saying that's where snowflake customers are headed. >>Yeah, absolutely. I think this is a movie that, you know, we've all seen before. At least those of us who've been in the industry long enough to, to see this movie play over a couple times. So I do think that's the future. And I think, you know, I loved what Richard said. I actually wrote it down. Cause I thought it was an amazing quote. He said, it buys us the ability to be unsure of the future. Th that that pretty much says it all the, the future is unknowable and the reality is using open data formats. You remain interoperable with any technology you want to utilize. If you want to use spark to train a machine learning model and you want to use Starbust to query via sequel, that's totally cool. They can both work off the same exact, you know, data, data sets by contrast, if you're, you know, focused on a proprietary model, then you're kind of locked in again to that model. I think the same applies to data, sharing to data products, to a wide variety of, of aspects of the data landscape that a proprietary approach kind of closes you in and locks you in. >>So I, I would say this Richard, I'd love to get your thoughts on it. Cause I talked to a lot of Oracle customers, not as many te data customers, but, but a lot of Oracle customers and they, you know, they'll admit, yeah, you know, they're jamming us on price and the license cost they give, but we do get value out of it. And so my question to you, Richard, is, is do the, let's call it data warehouse systems or the proprietary systems. Are they gonna deliver a greater ROI sooner? And is that in allure of, of that customers, you know, are attracted to, or can open platforms deliver as fast in ROI? >>I think the answer to that is it can depend a bit. It depends on your businesses skillset. So we are lucky that we have a number of proprietary teams that work in databases that provide our operational data capability. And we have teams of analytics and big data experts who can work with open data sets and open data formats. And so for those different teams, they can get to an ROI more quickly with different technologies for the business though, we can't do better for our operational data stores than proprietary databases. Today we can back off very tight SLAs to them. We can demonstrate reliability from millions of hours of those databases being run at enterprise scale, but for an analytics workload where increasing our business is growing in that direction, we can't do better than open data formats with cloud-based data mesh type technologies. And so it's not a simple answer. That one will always be the right answer for our business. We definitely have times when proprietary databases provide a capability that we couldn't easily represent or replicate with open technologies. >>Yeah. Richard, stay with you. You mentioned, you know, you know, some things before that, that strike me, you know, the data brick snowflake, you know, thing is, oh, is a lot of fun for analysts like me. You've got data bricks coming at it. Richard, you mentioned you have a lot of rockstar, data engineers, data bricks coming at it from a data engineering heritage. You get snowflake coming at it from an analytics heritage. Those two worlds are, are colliding people like PJI Mohan said, you know what? I think it's actually harder to play in the data engineering. So I E it's easier to for data engineering world to go into the analytics world versus the reverse, but thinking about up and coming engineers and developers preparing for this future of data engineering and data analytics, how, how should they be thinking about the future? What, what's your advice to those young people? >>So I think I'd probably fall back on general programming skill sets. So the advice that I saw years ago was if you have open source technologies, the pythons and Javas on your CV, you commander 20% pay, hike over people who can only do proprietary programming languages. And I think that's true of data technologies as well. And from a business point of view, that makes sense. I'd rather spend the money that I save on proprietary licenses on better engineers, because they can provide more value to the business that can innovate us beyond our competitors. So I think I would my advice to people who are starting here or trying to build teams to capitalize on data assets is begin with open license, free capabilities, because they're very cheap to experiment with. And they generate a lot of interest from people who want to join you as a business. And you can make them very successful early, early doors with, with your analytics journey. >>It's interesting. Again, analysts like myself, we do a lot of TCO work and have over the last 20 plus years. And in world of Oracle, you know, normally it's the staff, that's the biggest nut in total cost of ownership, not an Oracle. It's the it's the license cost is by far the biggest component in the, in the blame pie. All right, Justin, help us close out this segment. We've been talking about this sort of data mesh open, closed snowflake data bricks. Where does Starburst sort of as this engine for the data lake data lake house, the data warehouse fit in this, in this world? >>Yeah. So our view on how the future ultimately unfolds is we think that data lakes will be a natural center of gravity for a lot of the reasons that we described open data formats, lowest total cost of ownership, because you get to choose the cheapest storage available to you. Maybe that's S3 or Azure data lake storage, or Google cloud storage, or maybe it's on-prem object storage that you bought at a, at a really good price. So ultimately storing a lot of data in a deal lake makes a lot of sense, but I think what makes our perspective unique is we still don't think you're gonna get everything there either. We think that basically centralization of all your data assets is just an impossible endeavor. And so you wanna be able to access data that lives outside of the lake as well. So we kind of think of the lake as maybe the biggest place by volume in terms of how much data you have, but to, to have comprehensive analytics and to truly understand your business and understand it holistically, you need to be able to go access other data sources as well. And so that's the role that we wanna play is to be a single point of access for our customers, provide the right level of fine grained access controls so that the right people have access to the right data and ultimately make it easy to discover and consume via, you know, the creation of data products as well. >>Great. Okay. Thanks guys. Right after this quick break, we're gonna be back to debate whether the cloud data model that we see emerging and the so-called modern data stack is really modern, or is it the same wine new bottle? When it comes to data architectures, you're watching the cube, the leader in enterprise and emerging tech coverage. >>Your data is capable of producing incredible results, but data consumers are often left in the dark without fast access to the data they need. Starers makes your data visible from wherever it lives. Your company is acquiring more data in more places, more rapidly than ever to rely solely on a data centralization strategy. Whether it's in a lake or a warehouse is unrealistic. A single source of truth approach is no longer viable, but disconnected data silos are often left untapped. We need a new approach. One that embraces distributed data. One that enables fast and secure access to any of your data from anywhere with Starburst, you'll have the fastest query engine for the data lake that allows you to connect and analyze your disparate data sources no matter where they live Starburst provides the foundational technology required for you to build towards the vision of a decentralized data mesh Starburst enterprise and Starburst galaxy offer enterprise ready, connectivity, interoperability, and security features for multiple regions, multiple clouds and everchanging global regulatory requirements. The data is yours. And with Starburst, you can perform analytics anywhere in light of your world. >>Okay. We're back with Justin Boardman. CEO of Starbust Richard Jarvis is the CTO of EMI health and Theresa tongue is the cloud first technologist from Accenture. We're on July number three. And that is the claim that today's modern data stack is actually modern. So I guess that's the lie it's it is it's is that it's not modern. Justin, what do you say? >>Yeah. I mean, I think new isn't modern, right? I think it's the, it's the new data stack. It's the cloud data stack, but that doesn't necessarily mean it's modern. I think a lot of the components actually are exactly the same as what we've had for 40 years, rather than Terra data. You have snowflake rather than Informatica you have five trend. So it's the same general stack, just, you know, a cloud version of it. And I think a lot of the challenges that it plagued us for 40 years still maintain. >>So lemme come back to you just, but okay. But, but there are differences, right? I mean, you can scale, you can throw resources at the problem. You can separate compute from storage. You really, you know, there's a lot of money being thrown at that by venture capitalists and snowflake, you mentioned it's competitors. So that's different. Is it not, is that not at least an aspect of, of modern dial it up, dial it down. So what, what do you say to that? >>Well, it, it is, it's certainly taking, you know, what the cloud offers and taking advantage of that, but it's important to note that the cloud data warehouses out there are really just separating their compute from their storage. So it's allowing them to scale up and down, but your data still stored in a proprietary format. You're still locked in. You still have to ingest the data to get it even prepared for analysis. So a lot of the same sort of structural constraints that exist with the old enterprise data warehouse model OnPrem still exist just yes, a little bit more elastic now because the cloud offers that. >>So Theresa, let me go to you cuz you have cloud first in your, in your, your title. So what's what say you to this conversation? >>Well, even the cloud providers are looking towards more of a cloud continuum, right? So the centralized cloud, as we know it, maybe data lake data warehouse in the central place, that's not even how the cloud providers are looking at it. They have news query services. Every provider has one that really expands those queries to be beyond a single location. And if we look at a lot of where our, the future goes, right, that that's gonna very much fall the same thing. There was gonna be more edge. There's gonna be more on premise because of data sovereignty, data gravity, because you're working with different parts of the business that have already made major cloud investments in different cloud providers. Right? So there's a lot of reasons why the modern, I guess, the next modern generation of the data staff needs to be much more federated. >>Okay. So Richard, how do you deal with this? You you've obviously got, you know, the technical debt, the existing infrastructure it's on the books. You don't wanna just throw it out. A lot of, lot of conversation about modernizing applications, which a lot of times is a, you know, a microservices layer on top of leg legacy apps. How do you think about the modern data stack? >>Well, I think probably the first thing to say is that the stack really has to include the processes and people around the data as well is all well and good changing the technology. But if you don't modernize how people use that technology, then you're not going to be able to, to scale because just cuz you can scale CPU and storage doesn't mean you can get more people to use your data, to generate you more, more value for the business. And so what we've been looking at is really changing in very much aligned to data products and, and data mesh. How do you enable more people to consume the service and have the stack respond in a way that keeps costs low? Because that's important for our customers consuming this data, but also allows people to occasionally run enormous queries and then tick along with smaller ones when required. And it's a good job we did because during COVID all of a sudden we had enormous pressures on our data platform to answer really important life threatening queries. And if we couldn't scale both our data stack and our teams, we wouldn't have been able to answer those as quickly as we had. So I think the stack needs to support a scalable business, not just the technology itself. >>Well thank you for that. So Justin let's, let's try to break down what the critical aspects are of the modern data stack. So you think about the past, you know, five, seven years cloud obviously has given a different pricing model. De-risked experimentation, you know that we talked about the ability to scale up scale down, but it's, I'm, I'm taking away that that's not enough based on what Richard just said. The modern data stack has to serve the business and enable the business to build data products. I, I buy that. I'm a big fan of the data mesh concepts, even though we're early days. So what are the critical aspects if you had to think about, you know, paying, maybe putting some guardrails and definitions around the modern data stack, what does that look like? What are some of the attributes and, and principles there >>Of, of how it should look like or, or how >>It's yeah. What it should be. >>Yeah. Yeah. Well, I think, you know, in, in Theresa mentioned this in, in a previous segment about the data warehouse is not necessarily going to disappear. It just becomes one node, one element of the overall data mesh. And I, I certainly agree with that. So by no means, are we suggesting that, you know, snowflake or Redshift or whatever cloud data warehouse you may be using is going to disappear, but it's, it's not going to become the end all be all. It's not the, the central single source of truth. And I think that's the paradigm shift that needs to occur. And I think it's also worth noting that those who were the early adopters of the modern data stack were primarily digital, native born in the cloud young companies who had the benefit of, of idealism. They had the benefit of it was starting with a clean slate that does not reflect the vast majority of enterprises. >>And even those companies, as they grow up mature out of that ideal state, they go buy a business. Now they've got something on another cloud provider that has a different data stack and they have to deal with that heterogeneity that is just change and change is a part of life. And so I think there is an element here that is almost philosophical. It's like, do you believe in an absolute ideal where I can just fit everything into one place or do I believe in reality? And I think the far more pragmatic approach is really what data mesh represents. So to answer your question directly, I think it's adding, you know, the ability to access data that lives outside of the data warehouse, maybe living in open data formats in a data lake or accessing operational systems as well. Maybe you want to directly access data that lives in an Oracle database or a Mongo database or, or what have you. So creating that flexibility to really Futureproof yourself from the inevitable change that you will, you won't encounter over time. >>So thank you. So there, based on what Justin just said, I, my takeaway there is it's inclusive, whether it's a data Mar data hub, data lake data warehouse, it's a, just a node on the mesh. Okay. I get that. Does that include there on Preem data? O obviously it has to, what are you seeing in terms of the ability to, to take that data mesh concept on Preem? I mean, most implementations I've seen in data mesh, frankly really aren't, you know, adhering to the philosophy. They're maybe, maybe it's data lake and maybe it's using glue. You look at what JPMC is doing. Hello, fresh, a lot of stuff happening on the AWS cloud in that, you know, closed stack, if you will. What's the answer to that Theresa? >>I mean, I, I think it's a killer case for data. Me, the fact that you have valuable data sources, OnPrem, and then yet you still wanna modernize and take the best of cloud cloud is still, like we mentioned, there's a lot of great reasons for it around the economics and the way ability to tap into the innovation that the cloud providers are giving around data and AI architecture. It's an easy button. So the mesh allows you to have the best of both worlds. You can start using the data products on-prem or in the existing systems that are working already. It's meaningful for the business. At the same time, you can modernize the ones that make business sense because it needs better performance. It needs, you know, something that is, is cheaper or, or maybe just tap into better analytics to get better insights, right? So you're gonna be able to stretch and really have the best of both worlds. That, again, going back to Richard's point, that is meaningful by the business. Not everything has to have that one size fits all set a tool. >>Okay. Thank you. So Richard, you know, talking about data as product, wonder if we could give us your perspectives here, what are the advantages of treating data as a product? What, what role do data products have in the modern data stack? We talk about monetizing data. What are your thoughts on data products? >>So for us, one of the most important data products that we've been creating is taking data that is healthcare data across a wide variety of different settings. So information about patients' demographics about their, their treatment, about their medications and so on, and taking that into a standards format that can be utilized by a wide variety of different researchers because misinterpreting that data or having the data not presented in the way that the user is expecting means that you generate the wrong insight. And in any business, that's clearly not a desirable outcome, but when that insight is so critical, as it might be in healthcare or some security settings, you really have to have gone to the trouble of understanding the data, presenting it in a format that everyone can clearly agree on. And then letting people consume in a very structured, managed way, even if that data comes from a variety of different sources in, in, in the first place. And so our data product journey has really begun by standardizing data across a number of different silos through the data mesh. So we can present out both internally and through the right governance externally to, to researchers. >>So that data product through whatever APIs is, is accessible, it's discoverable, but it's obviously gotta be governed as well. You mentioned you, you appropriately provided to internally. Yeah. But also, you know, external folks as well. So the, so you've, you've architected that capability today >>We have, and because the data is standard, it can generate value much more quickly and we can be sure of the security and, and, and value that that's providing because the data product isn't just about formatting the data into the correct tables, it's understanding what it means to redact the data or to remove certain rows from it or to interpret what a date actually means. Is it the start of the contract or the start of the treatment or the date of birth of a patient? These things can be lost in the data storage without having the proper product management around the data to say in a very clear business context, what does this data mean? And what does it mean to process this data for a particular use case? >>Yeah, it makes sense. It's got the context. If the, if the domains own the data, you, you gotta cut through a lot of the, the, the centralized teams, the technical teams that, that data agnostic, they don't really have that context. All right. Let's send Justin, how does Starburst fit into this modern data stack? Bring us home. >>Yeah. So I think for us, it's really providing our customers with, you know, the flexibility to operate and analyze data that lives in a wide variety of different systems. Ultimately giving them that optionality, you know, and optionality provides the ability to reduce costs, store more in a data lake rather than data warehouse. It provides the ability for the fastest time to insight to access the data directly where it lives. And ultimately with this concept of data products that we've now, you know, incorporated into our offering as well, you can really create and, and curate, you know, data as a product to be shared and consumed. So we're trying to help enable the data mesh, you know, model and make that an appropriate compliment to, you know, the, the, the modern data stack that people have today. >>Excellent. Hey, I wanna thank Justin Theresa and Richard for joining us today. You guys are great. I big believers in the, in the data mesh concept, and I think, you know, we're seeing the future of data architecture. So thank you. Now, remember, all these conversations are gonna be available on the cube.net for on-demand viewing. You can also go to starburst.io. They have some great content on the website and they host some really thought provoking interviews and, and, and they have awesome resources, lots of data mesh conversations over there, and really good stuff in, in the resource section. So check that out. Thanks for watching the data doesn't lie or does it made possible by Starburst data? This is Dave Valante for the cube, and we'll see you next time. >>The explosion of data sources has forced organizations to modernize their systems and architecture and come to terms with one size does not fit all for data management today. Your teams are constantly moving and copying data, which requires time management. And in some cases, double paying for compute resources. Instead, what if you could access all your data anywhere using the BI tools and SQL skills your users already have. And what if this also included enterprise security and fast performance with Starburst enterprise, you can provide your data consumers with a single point of secure access to all of your data, no matter where it lives with features like strict, fine grained, access control, end to end data encryption and data masking Starburst meets the security standards of the largest companies. Starburst enterprise can easily be deployed anywhere and managed with insights where data teams holistically view their clusters operation and query execution. So they can reach meaningful business decisions faster, all this with the support of the largest team of Trino experts in the world, delivering fully tested stable releases and available to support you 24 7 to unlock the value in all of your data. You need a solution that easily fits with what you have today and can adapt to your architecture. Tomorrow. Starbust enterprise gives you the fastest path from big data to better decisions, cuz your team can't afford to wait. Trino was created to empower analytics anywhere and Starburst enterprise was created to give you the enterprise grade performance, connectivity, security management, and support your company needs organizations like Zolando Comcast and FINRA rely on Starburst to move their businesses forward. Contact us to get started.

>>Okay. We're back with Justin Boorman CEO of Starburst. Richard Jarvis is the CTO of EMI health and Teresa tongue is the cloud first technologist from Accenture. We're on July number three. And that is the claim that today's modern data stack is actually modern. So I guess that's the lie or it's it is it's is that it's not modern, Justin, what do you say? >>Yeah, I mean, I think new isn't modern, right? I think it's, the's the new data stack. It's the cloud data stack, but that doesn't necessarily mean it's modern. I think a lot of the components actually are exactly the same as what we've had for 40 years, rather than Terra data. You have snowflake rather than Informatica you have five trend. So it's the same general stack, just, you know, a cloud version of it. And I think a lot of the challenges that it plagued us for 40 years still maintain. >>So lemme come back to you just this, but okay. But, but there are differences, right? I mean, you can scale, you can throw resources at the problem. You can separate compute from storage. You really, you know, there's a lot of money being thrown at that by venture capitalists and snowflake, you mentioned it's competitors. So that's different. Is it not, is that not at least an aspect of, of modern dial it up, dial it down. So what, what do you say to that? >>Well, it, it is, it's certainly taking, you know, what the cloud offers and taking advantage of that, but it's important to note that the cloud data warehouses out there are really just separating their compute from their storage. So it's allowing them to scale up and down, but your data's still stored in a proprietary format. You're still locked in. You still have to ingest the data to get it even prepared for analysis. So a lot of the same sort of structural constraints that exist with the old enterprise data warehouse model OnPrem still exists just, yes, a little bit more elastic now because the cloud offers that. >>So Theresa, let me go to you cuz you have cloud first in your, in your, your title. So what's what say you to this conversation? >>Well, even the cloud providers are looking towards more of a cloud continuum, right? So the centralized cloud, as we know it, maybe data lake data warehouse in the central place, that's not even how the cloud providers are looking at it. They have news query services. Every provider has one that really expands those queries to be beyond a single location. And if we look at a lot of where our, the future goes, right, that that's gonna very much fall the same thing. There was gonna be more edge. There's gonna be more on premise because of data sovereignty, data gravity, because you're working with different parts of the business that have already made major cloud investments in different cloud providers. Right? So there's a lot of reasons why the modern, I guess the next modern generation of the data staff needs to be much more federated. >>Okay. So Richard, how do you deal with this? You you've obviously got, you know, the technical debt, the existing infrastructure it's on the books. You don't wanna just throw it out. A lot of, lot of conversation about modernizing applications, which a lot of times is a, you know, of microservices layer on top of leg legacy apps. Ho how do you think about the modern data stack? >>Well, I think probably the first thing to say is that the stack really has to include the processes and people around the data as well is all well and good changing the technology. But if you don't modernize how people use that technology, then you're not going to be able to, to scale because just cuz you can scale CPU and storage doesn't mean you can get more people to use your data, to generate you more value for the business. And so what we've been looking at is really changing in very much aligned to data products and, and data mesh. How do you enable more people to consume the service and have the stack respond in a way that keeps costs low? Because that's important for our customers consuming this data, but also allows people to occasionally run enormous queries and then tick along with smaller ones when required. And it's a good job we did because during COVID all of a sudden we had enormous pressures on our data platform to answer really important life threatening queries. And if we couldn't scale both our data stack and our teams, we wouldn't have been able to answer those as quickly as we had. So I think the stack needs to support a scalable business, not just the technology itself. >>Oh thank you for that. So Justin let's, let's try to break down what the critical aspects are of the modern data stack. So you think about the past, you know, five, seven years cloud obviously has given a different pricing model. Drisk experimentation, you know that we talked about the ability to scale up scale down, but it's, I'm, I'm taking away that that's not enough based on what Richard just said. The modern data stack has to serve the business and enable the business to build data products. I, I buy that I'm, you know, a big fan of the data mesh concepts, even though we're early days. So what are the critical aspects if you had to think about, you know, the paying, maybe putting some guardrails and definitions around the modern data stack, what does that look like? What are some of the attributes and principles there >>Of, of how it should look like or, or how >>Yeah. What it should be? >>Yeah. Yeah. Well, I think, you know, in Theresa mentioned this in, in a previous segment about the data warehouse is not necessarily going to disappear. It just becomes one node, one element of the overall data mesh. And I, I certainly agree with that. So by no means, are we suggesting that, you know, snowflake or Redshift or whatever cloud data warehouse you may be using is going to disappear, but it's, it's not going to become the end all be all. It's not the, the central single source of truth. And I think that's the paradigm shift that needs to occur. And I think it's also worth noting that those who were the early adopters of the modern data stack were primarily digital, native born in the cloud young companies who had the benefit of, of idealism. They had the benefit of starting with a clean slate that does not reflect the vast majority of enterprises. >>And even those companies, as they grow up mature out of that ideal state, they go by a business. Now they've got something on another cloud provider that has a different data stack and they have to deal with that heterogeneity that is just change and change is a part of life. And so I think there is an element here that is almost philosophical. It's like, do you believe in an absolute ideal where I can just fit everything into one place or do I believe in reality? And I think the far more pragmatic approach is really what data mesh represents. So to answer your question directly, I think it's adding, you know, the ability to access data that lives outside of the data warehouse, maybe living in open data formats in a data lake or accessing operational systems as well. Maybe you want to directly access data that lives in an Oracle database or a Mongo database or, or what have you. So creating that flexibility to really Futureproof yourself from the inevitable change that you will, you won't encounter over time. >>So thank you. So there, based on what Justin just said, I, I might take away there is it's inclusive, whether it's a data Mart, data hub, data lake data warehouse, it's a, just a node on the mesh. Okay. I get that. Does that include Theresa on, on Preem data? Obviously it has to, what are you seeing in terms of the ability to, to take that data mesh concept on pre I mean most implementations I've seen and data mesh, frankly really aren't, you know, adhering to the philosophy there. Maybe, maybe it's data lake and maybe it's using glue. You look at what JPMC is doing. Hello, fresh, a lot of stuff happening on the AWS cloud in that, you know, closed stack, if you will. What's the answer to that Theresa? >>I mean, I, I think it's a killer case for data mesh. The fact that you have valuable data sources, OnPrem, and then yet you still wanna modernize and take the best of cloud cloud is still, like we mentioned, there's a lot of great reasons for it around the economics and the way ability to tap into the innovation that the cloud providers are giving around data and AI architecture. It's an easy button. So the mesh allows you to have the best of both world. You can start using the data products on-prem or in the existing systems that are working already. It's meaningful for the business. At the same time, you can modernize the ones that make business sense because it needs better performance. It needs, you know, something that is, is cheaper or, or maybe just tap into better analytics to get better insights, right? So you're gonna be able to stretch and really have the best of both worlds that, again, going back to Richard's point, that is needful by the business. Not everything has to have that one size fits all set a tool. >>Okay. Thank you. So Richard, you know, you're talking about data as product. Wonder if we could give us your perspectives here, what are the advantages of treating data as a product? What, what role do data products have in the modern data stack? We talk about monetizing data. What are your thoughts on data products? >>So for us, one of the most important data products that we've been creating is taking data that is healthcare data across a wide variety of different settings. So information about patients' demographics about their, their treatment, about their medications and so on, and taking that into a standards format that can be utilized by a wide variety of different researchers because misinterpreting that data or having the data not presented in the way that the user is expecting means that you generate the wrong insight and in any business, that's clearly not a desirable outcome, but when that insight is so critical, as it might be in healthcare or some security settings, you really have to have gone to the trouble of understanding the data, presenting it in a format that everyone can clearly agree on. And then letting people consume in a very structured and managed way, even if that data comes from a variety of different sources in, in, in the first place. And so our data product journey has really begun by standardizing data across a number of different silos through the data mesh. So we can present out both internally and through the right governance externally to, to research is >>So that data product through whatever APIs is, is accessible, it's discoverable, but it's obviously gotta be governed as well. You mentioned appropriately provided to internally. Yeah. But also, you know, external folks as well. So the, so you've, you've architected that capability today >>We have and because the data is standard, it can generate value much more quickly and we can be sure of the security and, and, and value that that's providing because the data product isn't just about formatting the data into the right, correct tables, it's understanding what it means to redact the data or to remove certain rows from it or to interpret what a date actually means. Is it the start of the contract or the start of the treatment or the date of birth of a patient? These things can be lost in the data storage without having the proper product management around the data to say in a very clear business context, what does this data mean? And what does it mean to process this data for a particular use >>Case? Yeah, it makes sense. It's got the context. If the, if the domains on the data, you, you gotta cut through a lot of the, the, the centralized teams, the technical teams that, that data agnostic, they don't really have that context. All right. Let's end, Justin, how does Starburst fit into this modern data stack? Bring us home. >>Yeah. So I think for us, it's really providing our customers with, you know, the flexibility to operate and analyze data that lives in a wide variety of different systems. Ultimately giving them that optionality, you know, and optionality provides the ability to reduce costs, store more in a data lake rather than data warehouse. It provides the ability for the fastest time to insight to access the data directly where it lives. And ultimately with this concept of data products that we've now, you know, incorporated into our offering as well, you can really create and, and curate, you know, data as a product to be shared and consumed. So we're trying to help enable the data mesh, you know, model and make that an appropriate compliment to, you know, the, the, the modern data stack that people have today. >>Excellent. Hey, I wanna thank Justin Teresa and Richard for joining us today. You guys are great. I big believers in the, in the data mesh concept, and I think, you know, we're seeing the future of data architecture. So thank you. Now, remember, all these conversations are gonna be available on the cube.net for on-demand viewing. You can also go to starburst.io. They have some great content on the website and they host some really thought provoking interviews and, and, and they have awesome resources, lots of data mesh conversations over there, and really good stuff in, in the resource section. So check that out. Thanks for watching the data doesn't lie or does it made possible by Starburst data? This is Dave ante for the, and we'll see you next time.

>>We're back with Jess Borgman of Starburst and Richard Jarvis of emus health. Okay. We're gonna get into lie. Number two, and that is this an open source based platform cannot give you the performance and control that you can get with a proprietary system. Is that a lie? Justin, the enterprise data warehouse has been pretty dominant and has evolved and matured. Its stack has mature over the years. Why is it not the default platform for data? >>Yeah, well, I think that's become a lie over time. So I, I think, you know, if we go back 10 or 12 years ago with the advent of the first data lake really around Hudu, that probably was true that you couldn't get the performance that you needed to run fast, interactive, SQL queries in a data lake. Now a lot's changed in 10 or 12 years. I remember in the very early days, people would say, you'll, you'll never get performance because you need to be column. You need to store data in a column format. And then, you know, column formats were introduced to, to data lakes. You have Parque ORC file in aro that were created to ultimately deliver performance out of that. So, okay. We got, you know, largely over the performance hurdle, you know, more recently people will say, well, you don't have the ability to do updates and deletes like a traditional data warehouse. >>And now we've got the creation of new data formats, again like iceberg and Delta and DY that do allow for updates and delete. So I think the data lake has continued to mature. And I remember a, a quote from, you know, Kurt Monash many years ago where he said, you know, it takes six or seven years to build a functional database. I think that's that's right. And now we've had almost a decade go by. So, you know, these technologies have matured to really deliver very, very close to the same level performance and functionality of, of cloud data warehouses. So I think the, the reality is that's become a lie and now we have large giant hyperscale internet companies that, you know, don't have the traditional data warehouse at all. They do all of their analytics in a data lake. So I think we've, we've proven that it's very much possible today. >>Thank you for that. And so Richard, talk about your perspective as a practitioner in terms of what open brings you versus, I mean, the closed is it's open as a moving target. I remember Unix used to be open systems and so it's, it is an evolving, you know, spectrum, but, but from your perspective, what does open give you that you can't get from a proprietary system where you are fearful of in a proprietary system? >>I, I suppose for me open buys us the ability to be unsure about the future, because one thing that's always true about technology is it evolves in a, a direction, slightly different to what people expect. And what you don't want to end up is done is backed itself into a corner that then prevents it from innovating. So if you have chosen the technology and you've stored trillions of records in that technology and suddenly a new way of processing or machine learning comes out, you wanna be able to take advantage and your competitive edge might depend upon it. And so I suppose for us, we acknowledge that we don't have perfect vision of what the future might be. And so by backing open storage technologies, we can apply a number of different technologies to the processing of that data. And that gives us the ability to remain relevant, innovate on our data storage. And we have bought our way out of the, any performance concerns because we can use cloud scale infrastructure to scale up and scale down as we need. And so we don't have the concerns that we don't have enough hardware today to process what we want to do, but want to achieve. We can just scale up when we need it and scale back down. So open source has really allowed us to maintain the being at the cutting edge. >>So Justin, let me play devil's advocate here a little bit, and I've talked to JAK about this and you know, obviously her vision is there's an open source that, that data mesh is open source, an open source tooling, and it's not a proprietary, you know, you're not gonna buy a data mesh. You're gonna build it with, with open source toolings and, and vendors like you are gonna support it, but come back to sort of today, you can get to market with a proprietary solution faster. I'm gonna make that statement. You tell me if it's a lie and then you can say, okay, we support Apache iceberg. We're gonna support open source tooling, take a company like VMware, not really in the data business, but how, the way they embraced Kubernetes and, and you know, every new open source thing that comes along, they say, we do that too. Why can't proprietary systems do that and be as effective? >>Yeah, well, I think at least with the, within the data landscape saying that you can access open data formats like iceberg or, or others is, is a bit dis disingenuous because really what you're selling to your customer is a certain degree of performance, a certain SLA, and you know, those cloud data warehouses that can reach beyond their own proprietary storage drop all the performance that they were able to provide. So it is, it reminds me kind of, of, again, going back 10 or 12 years ago when everybody had a connector to hit and that they thought that was the solution, right? But the reality was, you know, a connector was not the same as running workloads in had back then. And I think, think similarly, you know, being able to connect to an external table that lives in an open data format, you know, you're, you're not going to give it the performance that your customers are accustomed to. And at the end of the day, they're always going to be predisposed. They're always going to be incentivized to get that data ingested into the data warehouse, cuz that's where they have control. And you know, the bottom line is the database industry has really been built around vendor lockin. I mean, from the start, how, how many people love Oracle today, but our customers, nonetheless, I think, you know, lockin is, is, is part of this industry. And I think that's really what we're trying to change with open data formats. >>Well, it's interesting reminded when I, you know, I see the, the gas price, the TSR gas price I, I drive up and then I say, oh, that's the cash price credit card. I gotta pay 20 cents more, but okay. But so the, the argument then, so let me, let me come back to you, Justin. So what's wrong with saying, Hey, we support open data formats, but yeah, you're gonna get better performance if you, if you, you keep it into our closed system, are you saying that long term that's gonna come back and bite you cuz you're gonna end up. You mentioned Oracle, you mentioned Teradata. Yeah. That's by, by implication, you're saying that's where snowflake customers are headed. >>Yeah, absolutely. I think this is a movie that, you know, we've all seen before. At least those of us who've been in the industry long enough to, to see this movie play over a couple times. So I do think that's the future. And I think, you know, I loved what Richard said. I actually wrote it down cause I thought it was amazing quote. He said, it buys us the ability to be unsure of the future. That that pretty much says it all the, the future is unknowable and the reality is using open data formats. You remain interoperable with any technology you want to utilize. If you want to use smart to train a machine learning model and you wanna use Starbust to query be a sequel, that's totally cool. They can both work off the same exact, you know, data, data sets by contrast, if you're, you know, focused on a proprietary model, then you're kind of locked in again to that model. I think the same applies to data, sharing to data products, to a wide variety of, of aspects of the data landscape that a proprietary approach kind of closes you and, and locks you in. >>So I would say this Richard, I'd love to get your thoughts on it. Cause I talked to a lot of Oracle customers, not as many te data customers, but, but a lot of Oracle customers and they, you know, they'll admit yeah, you know, they Jimin some price and the license cost they give, but we do get value out of it. And so my question to you, Richard, is, is do the, let's call it data warehouse systems or the proprietary systems. Are they gonna deliver a greater ROI sooner? And is that in allure of, of that customers, you know, are attracted to, or can open platforms deliver as fast an ROI? >>I think the answer to that is it can depend a bit. It depends on your business's skillset. So we are lucky that we have a number of proprietary teams that work in databases that provide our operational data capability. And we have teams of analytics and big data experts who can work with open data sets and open data formats. And so for those different teams, they can get to an ROI more quickly with different technologies for the business though, we can't do better for our operational data stores than proprietary databases. Today we can back off very tight SLAs to them. We can demonstrate reliability from millions of hours of those databases being run enterprise scale, but for an analytics workload where increasing our business is growing in that direction, we can't do better than open data formats with cloud based data mesh type technologies. And so it's not a simple answer. That one will always be the right answer for our business. We definitely have times when proprietary databases provide a capability that we couldn't easily represent or replicate with open technologies. >>Yeah. Richard, stay with you. You mentioned, you know, you know, some things before that, that strike me, you know, the data brick snowflake, you know, thing is a lot of fun for analysts like me. You've got data bricks coming at it. Richard, you mentioned you have a lot of rockstar, data engineers, data bricks coming at it from a data engineering heritage. You get snowflake coming at it from an analytics heritage. Those two worlds are, are colliding people like P Sanji Mohan said, you know what? I think it's actually harder to play in the data engineering. So I E it's easier to for data engineering world to go into the analytics world versus the reverse, but thinking about up and coming engineers and developers preparing for this future of data engineering and data analytics, how, how should they be thinking about the future? What, what's your advice to those young people? >>So I think I'd probably fall back on general programming skill sets. So the advice that I saw years ago was if you have open source technologies, the pythons and Javas on your CV, you command a 20% pay, hike over people who can only do proprietary programming languages. And I think that's true of data technologies as well. And from a business point of view, that makes sense. I'd rather spend the money that I save on proprietary licenses on better engineers, because they can provide more value to the business that can innovate us beyond our competitors. So I think I would my advice to people who are starting here or trying to build teams to capitalize on data assets is begin with open license, free capabilities, because they're very cheap to experiment with. And they generate a lot of interest from people who want to join you as a business. And you can make them very successful early, early doors with, with your analytics journey. >>It's interesting. Again, analysts like myself, we do a lot of TCO work and have over the last 20 plus years and in the world of Oracle, you know, normally it's the staff, that's the biggest nut in total cost of ownership, not an Oracle. It's the it's the license cost is by far the biggest component in the, in the blame pie. All right, Justin, help us close out this segment. We've been talking about this sort of data mesh open, closed snowflake data bricks. Where does Starburst sort of as this engine for the data lake data lake house, the data warehouse, it fit in this, in this world. >>Yeah. So our view on how the future ultimately unfolds is we think that data lakes will be a natural center of gravity for a lot of the reasons that we described open data formats, lowest total cost of ownership, because you get to choose the cheapest storage available to you. Maybe that's S3 or Azure data lake storage, or Google cloud storage, or maybe it's on-prem object storage that you bought at a, at a really good price. So ultimately storing a lot of data in a data lake makes a lot of sense, but I think what makes our perspective unique is we still don't think you're gonna get everything there either. We think that basically centralization of all your data assets is just an impossible endeavor. And so you wanna be able to access data that lives outside of the lake as well. So we kind of think of the lake as maybe the biggest place by volume in terms of how much data you have, but to, to have comprehensive analytics and to truly understand your business and understand it holistically, you need to be able to go access other data sources as well. And so that's the role that we wanna play is to be a single point of access for our customers, provide the right level of fine grained access control so that the right people have access to the right data and ultimately make it easy to discover and consume via, you know, the creation of data products as well. >>Great. Okay. Thanks guys. Right after this quick break, we're gonna be back to debate whether the cloud data model that we see emerging and the so-called modern data stack is really modern, or is it the same wine new bottle when it comes to data architectures, you're watching the cube, the leader in enterprise and emerging tech coverage.

>>In 2011, early Facebook employee and Cloudera co-founder Jeff Ocker famously said the best minds of my generation are thinking about how to get people to click on ads. And that sucks. Let's face it more than a decade later organizations continue to be frustrated with how difficult it is to get value from data and build a truly agile data driven enterprise. What does that even mean? You ask? Well, it means that everyone in the organization has the data they need when they need it. In a context that's relevant to advance the mission of an organization. Now that could mean cutting costs could mean increasing profits, driving productivity, saving lives, accelerating drug discovery, making better diagnoses, solving, supply chain problems, predicting weather disasters, simplifying processes, and thousands of other examples where data can completely transform people's lives beyond manipulating internet users to behave a certain way. We've heard the prognostications about the possibilities of data before and in fairness we've made progress, but the hard truth is the original promises of master data management, enterprise data, warehouses, data, Mars, data hubs, and yes, even data lakes were broken and left us wanting for more welcome to the data doesn't lie, or does it a series of conversations produced by the cube and made possible by Starburst data. >>I'm your host, Dave Lanta and joining me today are three industry experts. Justin Borgman is this co-founder and CEO of Starburst. Richard Jarvis is the CTO at EMI health and Theresa tongue is cloud first technologist at Accenture. Today we're gonna have a candid discussion that will expose the unfulfilled and yes, broken promises of a data past we'll expose data lies, big lies, little lies, white lies, and hidden truths. And we'll challenge, age old data conventions and bust some data myths. We're debating questions like is the demise of a single source of truth. Inevitable will the data warehouse ever have feature parody with the data lake or vice versa is the so-called modern data stack simply centralization in the cloud, AKA the old guards model in new cloud close. How can organizations rethink their data architectures and regimes to realize the true promises of data can and will and open ecosystem deliver on these promises in our lifetimes, we're spanning much of the Western world today. Richard is in the UK. Teresa is on the west coast and Justin is in Massachusetts with me. I'm in the cube studios about 30 miles outside of Boston folks. Welcome to the program. Thanks for coming on. Thanks for having us. Let's get right into it. You're very welcome. Now here's the first lie. The most effective data architecture is one that is centralized with a team of data specialists serving various lines of business. What do you think Justin? >>Yeah, definitely a lie. My first startup was a company called hit adapt, which was an early SQL engine for IDU that was acquired by Teradata. And when I got to Teradata, of course, Terada is the pioneer of that central enterprise data warehouse model. One of the things that I found fascinating was that not one of their customers had actually lived up to that vision of centralizing all of their data into one place. They all had data silos. They all had data in different systems. They had data on-prem data in the cloud. You know, those companies were acquiring other companies and inheriting their data architecture. So, you know, despite being the industry leader for 40 years, not one of their customers truly had everything in one place. So I think definitely history has proven that to be a lie. >>So Richard, from a practitioner's point of view, you know, what, what are your thoughts? I mean, there, there's a lot of pressure to cut cost, keep things centralized, you know, serve the business as best as possible from that standpoint. What, what is your experience, Joe? >>Yeah, I mean, I think I would echo Justin's experience really that we, as a business have grown up through acquisition, through storing data in different places sometimes to do information governance in different ways to store data in, in a platform that's close to data experts, people who really understand healthcare data from pharmacies or from, from doctors. And so, although if you were starting from a Greenfield site and you were building something brand new, you might be able to centralize all the data and all of the tooling and teams in one place. The reality is that that businesses just don't grow up like that. And, and it's just really impossible to get that academic perfection of, of storing everything in one place. >>Y you know, Theresa, I feel like Sarbanes Oxley kinda saved the data warehouse, you know? Right. But you actually did have to have a single version of the truth for certain financial data, but really for those, some of those other use cases, I, I mentioned, I, I do feel like the industry has kinda let us down. What's your take on this? Where does it make sense to have that sort of centralized approach versus where does it make sense to maybe decentralized? >>I, I think you gotta have centralized governance, right? So from the central team, for things like swans Oxley, for things like security, for certain very core data sets, having a centralized set of roles, responsibilities to really QA, right. To serve as a design authority for your entire data estate, just like you might with security, but how it's implemented has to be distributed. Otherwise you're not gonna be able to scale. Right? So being able to have different parts of the business really make the right data investments for their needs. And then ultimately you're gonna collaborate with your partners. So partners that are not within the company, right. External partners, we're gonna see a lot more data sharing and model creation. And so you're definitely going to be decentralized. >>So, you know, Justin, you guys last, geez, I think it was about a year ago, had a session on, on data mesh. It was a great program. You invited JAK, Dani, of course, she's the creator of the data mesh. And her one of our fundamental premises is that you've got this hyper specialized team that you've gotta go through. And if you want anything, but at the same time, these, these individuals actually become a bottleneck, even though they're some of the most talented people in the organization. So I guess question for you, Richard, how do you deal with that? Do you, do you organize so that there are a few sort of rock stars that, that, you know, build cubes and, and the like, and, and, and, or have you had any success in sort of decentralizing with, you know, your, your constituencies, that data model? >>Yeah. So, so we absolutely have got rockstar, data scientists and data guardians. If you like people who understand what it means to use this data, particularly as the data that we use at emos is very private it's healthcare information. And some of the, the rules and regulations around using the data are very complex and, and strict. So we have to have people who understand the usage of the data, then people who understand how to build models, how to process the data effectively. And you can think of them like consultants to the wider business, because a pharmacist might not understand how to structure a SQL query, but they do understand how they want to process medication information to improve patient lives. And so that becomes a, a consulting type experience from a, a set of rock stars to help a, a more decentralized business who needs to, to understand the data and to generate some valuable output. >>Justin, what do you say to a, to a customer or prospect that says, look, Justin, I'm gonna, I got a centralized team and that's the most cost effective way to serve the business. Otherwise I got, I got duplication. What do you say to that? >>Well, I, I would argue it's probably not the most cost effective and, and the reason being really twofold. I think, first of all, when you are deploying a enterprise data warehouse model, the, the data warehouse itself is very expensive, generally speaking. And so you're putting all of your most valuable data in the hands of one vendor who now has tremendous leverage over you, you know, for many, many years to come, I think that's the story of Oracle or Terra data or other proprietary database systems. But the other aspect I think is that the reality is those central data warehouse teams is as much as they are experts in the technology. They don't necessarily understand the data itself. And this is one of the core tenets of data mash that that jam writes about is this idea of the domain owners actually know the data the best. >>And so by, you know, not only acknowledging that data is generally decentralized and to your earlier point about, so Oxley, maybe saving the data warehouse, I would argue maybe GDPR and data sovereignty will destroy it because data has to be decentralized for, for those laws to be compliant. But I think the reality is, you know, the data mesh model basically says, data's decentralized, and we're gonna turn that into an asset rather than a liability. And we're gonna turn that into an asset by empowering the people that know the data, the best to participate in the process of, you know, curating and creating data products for, for consumption. So I think when you think about it, that way, you're going to get higher quality data and faster time to insight, which is ultimately going to drive more revenue for your business and reduce costs. So I think that that's the way I see the two, the two models comparing and con contrasting. >>So do you think the demise of the data warehouse is inevitable? I mean, I mean, you know, there Theresa you work with a lot of clients, they're not just gonna rip and replace their existing infrastructure. Maybe they're gonna build on top of it, but the, what does that mean? Does that mean the ed w just becomes, you know, less and less valuable over time, or it's maybe just isolated to specific use cases. What's your take on that? >>Listen, I still would love all my data within a data warehouse would love it. Mastered would love it owned by essential team. Right? I think that's still what I would love to have. That's just not the reality, right? The investment to actually migrate and keep that up to date. I would say it's a losing battle. Like we've been trying to do it for a long time. Nobody has the budgets and then data changes, right? There's gonna be a new technology. That's gonna emerge that we're gonna wanna tap into. There's gonna be not enough investment to bring all the legacy, but still very useful systems into that centralized view. So you keep the data warehouse. I think it's a very, very valuable, very high performance tool for what it's there for, but you could have this, you know, new mesh layer that still takes advantage of the things. I mentioned, the data products in the systems that are meaningful today and the data products that actually might span a number of systems. Maybe either those that either source systems, the domains that know it best, or the consumer based systems and products that need to be packaged in a way that be really meaningful for that end user, right? Each of those are useful for a different part of the business and making sure that the mesh actually allows you to lose all of them. >>So, Richard, let me ask you, you take, take Gemma's principles back to those. You got, you know, the domain ownership and, and, and data as product. Okay, great. Sounds good. But it creates what I would argue or two, you know, challenges self-serve infrastructure let's park that for a second. And then in your industry, one of the high, most regulated, most sensitive computational governance, how do you automate and ensure federated governance in that mesh model that Theresa was just talking about? >>Well, it absolutely depends on some of the tooling and processes that you put in place around those tools to be, to centralize the security and the governance of the data. And, and I think, although a data warehouse makes that very simple, cause it's a single tool, it's not impossible with some of the data mesh technologies that are available. And so what we've done at EMI is we have a single security layer that sits on top of our data mesh, which means that no matter which user is accessing, which data source, we go through a well audited well understood security layer. That means that we know exactly who's got access to which data field, which data tables. And then everything that they do is, is audited in a very kind of standard way, regardless of the underlying data storage technology. So for me, although storing the data in one place might not be possible understanding where your source of truth is and securing that in a common way is still a valuable approach and you can do it without having to bring all that data into a single bucket so that it's all in one place. >>And, and so having done that and investing quite heavily in making that possible has paid dividends in terms of giving wider access to the platform and ensuring that only data that's available under GDPR and other regulations is being used by, by the data users. >>Yeah. So Justin mean Democrat, we always talk about data democratization and you know, up until recently, they really haven't been line of sight as to how to get there. But do you have anything to add to this because you're essentially taking, you know, doing analytic queries and with data, that's all dispersed all over the, how are you seeing your customers handle this, this challenge? >>Yeah, I mean, I think data products is a really interesting aspect of the answer to that. It allows you to, again, leverage the data domain owners, people know the data, the best to, to create, you know, data as a product ultimately to be consumed. And we try to represent that in our product as effectively, almost eCommerce, like experience where you go and discover and look for the data products that have been created in your organization. And then you can start to consume them as, as you'd like. And so really trying to build on that notion of, you know, data democratization and self-service, and making it very easy to discover and, and start to use with whatever BI tool you, you may like, or even just running, you know, SQL queries yourself. >>Okay. G guys grab a sip of water. After the short break, we'll be back to debate whether proprietary or open platforms are the best path to the future of data excellence. Keep it right there.

>>Hey, welcome back to the cubes. Continuing coverage of AWS reinvent 2021. I'm your host, Lisa Martin. This is day two, our first full day of coverage. But day two, we have two life sets here with AWS and its ecosystem partners to remote sets over a hundred guests on the program. We're going to be talking about the next decade of cloud innovation, and I'm pleased to welcome back to cube alumni to the program. Justin Borkman is here, the co-founder and CEO of Starburst and Teresa Tung, the cloud first chief technologist at Accenture guys. Welcome back to the queue. Thank you. Thank you for having me. Good to have you back. So, so Teresa, I was doing some research on you and I see you are the most prolific prolific inventor at Accenture with over 220 patents and patent applications. That's huge. Congratulations. Thank you. Thank you. And I love your title. I think it's intriguing. I'd like to learn a little bit more about your role cloud-first chief technologist. Tell me about, >>Well, I get to think about the future of cloud and if you think about clouded powers, everything experiences in our everyday lives and our homes and our car in our stores. So pretty much I get to be cute, right? The rest of Accenture's James Bond >>And your queue. I like that. Wow. What a great analogy. Just to talk to me a little bit, I know service has been on the program before, but give me a little bit of an overview of the company, what you guys do. What were some of the gaps in the markets that you saw a few years ago and said, we have an idea to solve this? Sure. >>So Starburst offers a distributed query engine, which essentially means we're able to run SQL queries on data anywhere, uh, could be in traditional relational databases, data lakes in the cloud on-prem. And I think that was the gap that we saw was basically that people had data everywhere and really had a challenge with how they analyze that data. And, uh, my co-founders are the creators of an open source project originally called Presto now called Trino. And it's how Facebook and Netflix and Airbnb and, and a number of the internet companies run their analytics. And so our idea was basically to take that, commercialize that and make it enterprise grade for the thousands of other companies that are struggling with data management, data analytics problems. >>And that's one of the things we've seen explode during the last 22 months, among many other things is data, right? In every company. These days has to be a data company. If they're not, there's a competitor in the rear view rear view mirror, ready to come and take that place. We're going to talk about the data mesh Teresa, we're going to start with you. This is not a new car. This is a new concept. Talk to us about what a data mesh is and why organizations need to embrace this >>Approach. So there's a canonical definition about data mesh with four attributes and any data geek or data architect really resonates with them. So number one, it's really routed decentralized domain ownership. So data is not within a single line of business within a single entity within a single partner has to be across different domains. Second is publishing data as products. And so instead of these really, you know, technology solutions, data sets, data tables, really thinking about the product and who's going to use it. The third one is really around self-service infrastructure. So you want everybody to be able to use those products. And finally, number four, it's really about federated and global governance. So even though their products, you really need to make sure that you're doing the right things, but what's data money. >>We're not talking about a single tool here, right? This is more of a, an approach, a solution. >>It is a data strategy first and foremost, right? So companies, they are multi-cloud, they have many projects going on, they are on premise. So what do you do about it? And so that's the reality of the situation today, and it's first and foremost, a business strategy and framework to think about the data. And then there's a new architecture that underlines and supports that >>Just didn't talk to me about when you're having customer conversations. Obviously organizations need to have a core data strategy that runs the business. They need to be able to, to democratize really truly democratized data access across all business units. What are some of the, what are some of your customer conversations like are customers really embracing the data strategy, vision and approach? >>Yeah, well, I think as you alluded to, you know, every business is data-driven today and the pandemic, if anything has accelerated digital transformation in that move to become data-driven. So it's imperative that every business of every shape and size really put the power of data in the hands of everyone within their organization. And I think part of what's making data mesh resonates so well, is that decentralization concept that Teresa spoke about? Like, I think companies acknowledge that data is inherently decentralized. They have a lot of different database systems, different teams and data mesh is a framework for thinking about that. Then not only acknowledges that reality, but also braces it and basically says there's actually advantages to this decentralized approach. And so I think that's, what's driving the interest level in the data mesh, uh, paradigm. And it's been exciting to work with customers as they think about that strategy. And I think that, you know, essentially every company in the space is, is in transition, whether they're moving from on cloud to the prem, uh, to, uh, sorry, from on-prem to the cloud or from one cloud to another cloud or undergoing that digital transformation, they have left behind data everywhere. And so they're, they're trying to wrestle with how to grasp that. >>And there's, we know that there's so much value in data. The, the need is to be able to get it, to be able to analyze it quickly in real time. I think another thing we learned in the pandemic is it real-time is no longer a nice to have. It is essential for businesses in every organization. So Theresa let's talk about how Accenture and servers are working together to take the data mesh from a concept of framework and put this into production into execution. >>Yeah. I mean, many clients are already doing some aspect of the data mesh as I listed those four attributes. I'm sure everybody thought like I'm already doing some of this. And so a lot of that is reviewing your existing data projects and looking at it from a data product landscape we're at Amazon, right? Amazon famous for being customer obsessed. So in data, we're not always customer obsessed. We put up tables, we put up data sets, feature stores. Who's actually going to use this data. What's the value from it. And I think that's a big change. And so a lot of what we're doing is helping apply that product lens, a literal product lens and thinking about the customer. >>So what are some w you know, we often talk about outcomes, everything being outcomes focused and customers, vendors wanting to help customers deliver big outcomes, you know, cost reduction, et cetera, things like that. How, what are some of the key outcomes Theresa that the data mesh framework unlocks for organizations in any industry to be able to leverage? >>Yeah. I mean, it really depends on the product. Some of it is organizational efficiency and data-driven decisions. So just by the able to see the data, see what's happening now, that's great. But then you have so beyond the, now what the, so what the analytics, right. Both predictive prescriptive analytics. So what, so now I have all this data I can analyze and drive and predict. And then finally, the, what if, if I have this data and my partners have this data in this mesh, and I can use it, I can ask a lot of what if and, and kind of game out scenarios about what if I did things differently, all of this in a very virtualized data-driven fashion, >>Right? Well, we've been talking about being data-driven for years and years and years, but it's one thing to say that it's a whole other thing to actually be able to put that into practice and to use it, to develop new products and services, delight customers, right. And, and really achieve the competitive advantage that businesses want to have. Just so talk to me about how your customer conversations have changed in the last 22 months, as we've seen this massive acceleration of digital transformation companies initially, really trying to survive and figure out how to pivot, not once, but multiple times. How are those customer conversations changing now is as that data strategy becomes core to the survival of every business and its ability to thrive. >>Yeah. I mean, I think it's accelerated everything and, and that's been obviously good for companies like us and like Accenture, cause there's a lot of work to be done out there. Um, but I think it's a transition from a storage centric mindset to more of an analytics centric mindset. You know, I think traditionally data warehousing has been all about moving data into one central place. And, and once you get it there, then you can analyze it. But I think companies don't have the time to wait for that anymore. Right there, there's no time to build all the ETL pipelines and maintain them and get all of that data together. We need to shorten that time to insight. And that's really what we, what we've been focusing on with our, with our customers, >>Shorten that time to insight to get that value out of the data faster. Exactly. Like I said, you know, the time is no longer a nice to have. It's an absolute differentiator for folks in every business. And as, as in our consumer lives, we have this expectation that we can get whatever we want on our phone, on any device, 24 by seven. And of course now in our business lives, we're having the same expectation, but you have to be able to unlock that access to that data, to be able to do the analytics, to make the decisions based on what the data say. Are you, are you finding our total? Let's talk about a little bit about the go to market strategy. You guys go in together. Talk to me about how you're working with AWS, Theresa, we'll start with you. And then Justin we'll head over to you. Okay. >>Well, a lot of this is powered by the cloud, right? So being able to imagine a new data business to run the analytics on it and then push it out, all of that is often cloud-based. But then the great thing about data mesh it's it gives you a framework to look at and tap into multi-cloud on-prem edge data, right? Data that can't be moved because it is a private and secure has to be at the edge and on-prem so you need to have that's their data reality. And the cloud really makes this easier to do. And then with data virtualization, especially coming from the digital natives, we know it scales >>Just to talk to me about it from your perspective that the GTL. >>Yeah. So, I mean, I think, uh, data mesh is really about people process and technology. I think Theresa alluded to it as a strategy. It's, it's more than just technology. Obviously we bring some of that technology to bear by allowing customers to query the data where it lives. But the people in process side is just as important training people to kind of think about how they do data management, data analytics differently is essential thinking about how to create data as a product. That's one of the core principles that Theresa mentioned, you know, that's where I think, um, you know, folks like Accenture can be really instrumental in helping people drive that transformational change within their organization. And that's >>Hard. Transformational change is hard with, you know, the last 22 months. I've been hard on everyone for every reason. How are you facilitating? I'm curious, like to get Theresa, we'll start with you, your perspectives on how our together as servers and Accenture, with the power of AWS, helping to drive that cultural change within organizations. Because like we talked about Justin there, nobody has extra time to waste on anything these days. >>The good news is there's that imperative, right? Every business is a digital business. We found that our technology leaders, right, the top 10% investors in digital, they are outperforming are the laggards. So before pandemic, it's times to post pep devek times five, so there's a need to change. And so data is really the heart of the company. That's how you unlock your technical debt into technical wealth. And so really using cloud and technologies like Starburst and data virtualization is how we can actually do that. >>And so how do you, Justin, how does Starburst help organizations transfer that technical debt or reduce it? How does the D how does the data much help facilitate that? Because we talk about technical debt and it can, it can really add up. >>Yeah, well, a lot of people use us, uh, or think about us as an abstraction layer above the different data sources that they have. So they may have legacy data sources today. Um, then maybe they want to move off of over time, um, could be classical data, warehouses, other classical, uh, relational databases, perhaps they're moving to the cloud. And by leveraging Starburst as this abstraction, they can query the data that they have today, while in the background, moving data into the cloud or moving it into the new data stores that they want to utilize. And it sort of hides that complexity. It decouples the end user experience, the business analyst, the data scientists from where the data lives. And I think that gives people a lot of freedom and a lot of optionality. And I think, you know, the only constant is change. Um, and so creating an architecture that can stand the test of time, I think is really, really important. >>Absolutely. Speaking of change, I just saw the announcement about Starburst galaxy fully managed SAS platform now available in all three major clouds. Of course, here we are at AWS. This is a, is this a big directional shift for servers? >>It is, you know, uh, I think there's great precedent within open source enterprise software companies like Mongo DB or confluent who started with a self managed product, much the way that we did, and then moved in the direction of creating a SAS product, a cloud hosted, fully managed product that really I think, expands the market. And that's really essentially what we're doing with galaxy galaxy is designed to be as easy as possible. Um, you know, Starburst was already powerful. This makes it powerful and easy. And, uh, and, and in our view, can, can hopefully expand the market to thousands of potential customers that can now leverage this technology in a, in a faster, easier way, >>Just in sticking with you for a minute. Talk to me about kind of where you're going in, where services heading in terms of support for the data mesh architecture across industries. >>Yeah. So a couple of things that we've, we've done recently, and whether we're doing, uh, as we speak, one is, uh, we introduced a new capability. We call star gate. Now star gate is a connector between Starburst clusters. So you're going to have a Starbucks cluster, and let's say Azure service cluster in AWS, a Starbucks cluster, maybe an AWS west and AWS east. And this basically pushes the processing to where the data lives. So again, living within this construct of, uh, of decentralized data that a data mesh is all about, this allows you to do that at an even greater level of abstraction. So it doesn't even matter what cloud region the data lives in or what cloud entirely it lives in. And there are a lot of important applications for this, not only latency in terms of giving you fast, uh, ability to join across those different clouds, but also, uh, data sovereignty constraints, right? >>Um, increasingly important, especially in Europe, but increasingly everywhere. And, you know, if your data isn't Switzerland, it needs to stay in Switzerland. So starting date as a way of pushing the processing to Switzerland. So you're minimizing the data that you need to pull back to complete your analysis. And, uh, and so we think that's a big deal about, you know, kind of enabling a data mash on a, on a global scale. Um, another thing we're working on back to the point of data products is how do customers curate and create these data products and share them within their organization. And so we're investing heavily in our product to make that easier as well, because I think back to one of the things, uh, Theresa said, it's, it's really all about, uh, making this practical and finding quick wins that customers can deploy, deploy in their data mess journey, right? >>This quick wins are key. So Theresa, last question to you, where should companies go to get started today? Obviously everybody has gotten, we're still in this work from anywhere environment. Companies have tons of data, tons of sources of data, did it, infrastructure's already in place. How did they go and get started with data? >>I think they should start looking at their data projects and thinking about the best data products. I think just that mindset shift about thinking about who's this for what's the business value. And then underneath that architecture and support comes to bear. And then thinking about who are the products that your product could work better with just like any other practice partnerships, like what we have with AWS, right? Like that's a stronger together sort of thing, >>Right? So there's that kind of that cultural component that really strategic shift in thinking and on the architecture. Awesome guys, thank you so much for joining me on the program, coming back on the cube at re-invent talking about data mesh really help. You can help organizations and industry put that together and what's going on at service. We appreciate your time. Thanks again. All right. For my guests, I'm Lisa Martin, you're watching the cubes coverage of AWS reinvent 2021. The cube is the leader in global live tech coverage. We'll be right back.

>> From theCUBE studios in Palo Alto in Boston bringing you data driven insights from theCUBE and ETR. This is breaking analysis with Dave Vellante. >> The term Supercloud is somewhat new, but the concepts behind it have been bubbling for years, early last decade when NIST put forth a definition of cloud computing it said services had to be accessible over a public network essentially cutting the on-prem crowd out of the cloud conversation. Now a guy named Chuck Hollis, who was a field CTO at EMC at the time and a prolific blogger objected to that criterion and laid out his vision for what he termed a private cloud. Now, in that post, he showed a workload running both on premises and in a public cloud sharing the underlying resources in an automated and seamless manner. What later became known more broadly as hybrid cloud that vision as we now know, really never materialized, and we were left with multi-cloud sets of largely incompatible and disconnected cloud services running in separate silos. The point is what Hollis laid out, IE the ability to abstract underlying infrastructure complexity and run workloads across multiple heterogeneous estates with an identical experience is what super cloud is all about. Hello and welcome to this week's Wikibon cube insights powered by ETR and this breaking analysis. We share what we hope to learn from super cloud 22 next week, next Tuesday at 9:00 AM Pacific. The community is gathering for Supercloud 22 an inclusive pilot symposium hosted by theCUBE and made possible by VMware and other founding partners. It's a one day single track event with more than 25 speakers digging into the architectural, the technical, structural and business aspects of Supercloud. This is a hybrid event with a live program in the morning running out of our Palo Alto studio and pre-recorded content in the afternoon featuring industry leaders, technologists, analysts and investors up and down the technology stack. Now, as I said up front the seeds of super cloud were sewn early last decade. After the very first reinvent we published our Amazon gorilla post, that scene in the upper right corner here. And we talked about how to differentiate from Amazon and form ecosystems around industries and data and how the cloud would change IT permanently. And then up in the upper left we put up a post on the old Wikibon Wiki. Yeah, it used to be a Wiki. Check out my hair by the way way no gray, that's how long ago this was. And we talked about in that post how to compete in the Amazon economy. And we showed a graph of how IT economics were changing. And cloud services had marginal economics that looked more like software than hardware at scale. And this would reset, we said opportunities for both technology sellers and buyers for the next 20 years. And this came into sharper focus in the ensuing years culminating in a milestone post by Greylock's Jerry Chen called Castles in the Cloud. It was an inspiration and catalyst for us using the term Supercloud in John Furrier's post prior to reinvent 2021. So we started to flesh out this idea of Supercloud where companies of all types build services on top of hyperscale infrastructure and across multiple clouds, going beyond multicloud 1.0, if you will, which was really a symptom, as we said, many times of multi-vendor at least that's what we argued. And despite its fuzzy definition, it resonated with people because they knew something was brewing, Keith Townsend the CTO advisor, even though he frankly, wasn't a big fan of the buzzy nature of the term Supercloud posted this awesome Blackboard on Twitter take a listen to how he framed it. Please play the clip. >> Is VMware the right company to make the super cloud work, term that Wikibon came up with to describe the taking of discreet services. So it says RDS from AWS, cloud compute engines from GCP and authentication from Azure to build SaaS applications or enterprise applications that connect back to your data center, is VMware's cross cloud vision 'cause it is just a vision today, the right approach. Or should you be looking towards companies like HashiCorp to provide this overall capability that we all agree, or maybe you don't that we need in an enterprise comment below your thoughts. >> So I really like that Keith has deep practitioner knowledge and lays out a couple of options. I especially like the examples he uses of cloud services. He recognizes the need for cross cloud services and he notes this capability is aspirational today. Remember this was eight or nine months ago and he brings HashiCorp into the conversation as they're one of the speakers at Supercloud 22 and he asks the community, what they think, the thing is we're trying to really test out this concept and people like Keith are instrumental as collaborators. Now I'm sure you're not surprised to hear that mot everyone is on board with the Supercloud meme, in particular Charles Fitzgerald has been a wonderful collaborator just by his hilarious criticisms of the concept. After a couple of super cloud posts, Charles put up his second rendition of "Supercloudifragilisticexpialidoucious". I mean, it's just beautiful, but to boot, he put up this picture of Baghdad Bob asking us to just stop, Bob's real name is Mohamed Said al-Sahaf. He was the minister of propaganda for Sadam Husein during the 2003 invasion of Iraq. And he made these outrageous claims of, you know US troops running in fear and putting down their arms and so forth. So anyway, Charles laid out several frankly very helpful critiques of Supercloud which has led us to really advance the definition and catalyze the community's thinking on the topic. Now, one of his issues and there are many is we said a prerequisite of super cloud was a super PaaS layer. Gartner's Lydia Leong chimed in saying there were many examples of successful PaaS vendors built on top of a hyperscaler some having the option to run in more than one cloud provider. But the key point we're trying to explore is the degree to which that PaaS layer is purpose built for a specific super cloud function. And not only runs in more than one cloud provider, Lydia but runs across multiple clouds simultaneously creating an identical developer experience irrespective of a state. Now, maybe that's what Lydia meant. It's hard to say from just a tweet and she's a sharp lady, so, and knows more about that market, that PaaS market, than I do. But to the former point at Supercloud 22, we have several examples. We're going to test. One is Oracle and Microsoft's recent announcement to run database services on OCI and Azure, making them appear as one rather than use an off the shelf platform. Oracle claims to have developed a capability for developers specifically built to ensure high performance low latency, and a common experience for developers across clouds. Another example we're going to test is Snowflake. I'll be interviewing Benoit Dageville co-founder of Snowflake to understand the degree to which Snowflake's recent announcement of an application development platform is perfect built, purpose built for the Snowflake data cloud. Is it just a plain old pass, big whoop as Lydia claims or is it something new and innovative, by the way we invited Charles Fitz to participate in Supercloud 22 and he decline saying in addition to a few other somewhat insulting things there's definitely interesting new stuff brewing that isn't traditional cloud or SaaS but branding at all super cloud doesn't help either. Well, indeed, we agree with part of that and we'll see if it helps advanced thinking and helps customers really plan for the future. And that's why Supercloud 22 has going to feature some of the best analysts in the business in The Great Supercloud Debate. In addition to Keith Townsend and Maribel Lopez of Lopez research and Sanjeev Mohan from former Gartner analyst and principal at SanjMo participated in this session. Now we don't want to mislead you. We don't want to imply that these analysts are hopping on the super cloud bandwagon but they're more than willing to go through the thought experiment and mental exercise. And, we had a great conversation that you don't want to miss. Maribel Lopez had what I thought was a really excellent way to think about this. She used TCP/IP as an historical example, listen to what she said. >> And Sanjeev Mohan has some excellent thoughts on the feasibility of an open versus de facto standard getting us to the vision of Supercloud, what's possible and what's likely now, again, I don't want to imply that these analysts are out banging the Supercloud drum. They're not necessarily doing that, but they do I think it's fair to say believe that something new is bubbling and whether it's called Supercloud or multicloud 2.0 or cross cloud services or whatever name you choose it's not multicloud of the 2010s and we chose Supercloud. So our goal here is to advance the discussion on what's next in cloud and Supercloud is meant to be a term to describe that future of cloud and specifically the cloud opportunities that can be built on top of hyperscale, compute, storage, networking machine learning, and other services at scale. And that is why we posted this piece on Answering the top 10 questions about Supercloud. Many of which were floated by Charles Fitzgerald and others in the community. Why does the industry need another term what's really new and different? And what is hype? What specific problems does Supercloud solve? What are the salient characteristics of Supercloud? What's different beyond multicloud? What is a super pass? Is it necessary to have a Supercloud? How will applications evolve on superclouds? What workloads will run? All these questions will be addressed in detail as a way to advance the discussion and help practitioners and business people understand what's real today. And what's possible with cloud in the near future. And one other question we'll address is who will build super clouds? And what new entrance we can expect. This is an ETR graphic that we showed in a previous episode of breaking analysis, and it lays out some of the companies we think are building super clouds or in a position to do so, by the way the Y axis shows net score or spending velocity and the X axis depicts presence in the ETR survey of more than 1200 respondents. But the key callouts to this slide in addition to some of the smaller firms that aren't yet showing up in the ETR data like Chaossearch and Starburst and Aviatrix and Clumio but the really interesting additions are industry players Walmart with Azure, Capital one and Goldman Sachs with AWS, Oracle, with Cerner. These we think are early examples, bubbling up of industry clouds that will eventually become super clouds. So we'll explore these and other trends to get the community's input on how this will all play out. These are the things we hope you'll take away from Supercloud 22. And we have an amazing lineup of experts to answer your question. Technologists like Kit Colbert, Adrian Cockcroft, Mariana Tessel, Chris Hoff, Will DeForest, Ali Ghodsi, Benoit Dageville, Muddu Sudhakar and many other tech athletes, investors like Jerry Chen and In Sik Rhee the analyst we featured earlier, Paula Hansen talking about go to market in a multi-cloud world Gee Rittenhouse talking about cloud security, David McJannet, Bhaskar Gorti of Platform9 and many, many more. And of course you, so please go to theCUBE.net and register for Supercloud 22, really lightweight reg. We're not doing this for lead gen. We're doing it for collaboration. If you sign in you can get the chat and ask questions in real time. So don't miss this inaugural event Supercloud 22 on August 9th at 9:00 AM Pacific. We'll see you there. Okay. That's it for today. Thanks for watching. Thank you to Alex Myerson who's on production and manages the podcast. Kristen Martin and Cheryl Knight. They help get the word out on social media and in our newsletters. And Rob Hof is our editor in chief over at SiliconANGLE. Does some really wonderful editing. Thank you to all. Remember these episodes are all available as podcasts wherever you listen, just search breaking analysis podcast. I publish each week on wikibon.com and Siliconangle.com. And you can email me at David.Vellantesiliconangle.com or DM me at Dvellante, comment on my LinkedIn post. Please do check out ETR.AI for the best survey data in the enterprise tech business. This is Dave Vellante for theCUBE insights powered by ETR. Thanks for watching. And we'll see you next week in Palo Alto at Supercloud 22 or next time on breaking analysis. (calm music)

>> From the theCUBE studios in Palo Alto in Boston, bringing you data driven insights from theCUBE and ETR. This is "Breaking Analysis" with Dave Vellante. >> Welcome to this week's Wikibon, theCUBE's insights powered by ETR. As we exited the isolation economy last year, supercloud is a term that we introduced to describe something new that was happening in the world of cloud. In this Breaking Analysis, we address the 10 most frequently asked questions we get around supercloud. Okay, let's review these frequently asked questions on supercloud that we're going to try to answer today. Look at an industry that's full of hype and buzzwords. Why the hell does anyone need a new term? Aren't hyperscalers building out superclouds? We'll try to answer why the term supercloud connotes something different from hyperscale clouds. And we'll talk about the problems that superclouds solve specifically. And we'll further define the critical aspects of a supercloud architecture. We often get asked, isn't this just multi-cloud? Well, we don't think so, and we'll explain why in this Breaking Analysis. Now in an earlier episode, we introduced the notion of super PaaS. Well, isn't a plain vanilla PaaS already a super PaaS? Again, we don't think so, and we'll explain why. Who will actually build and who are the players currently building superclouds? What workloads and services will run on superclouds? And 8-A or number nine, what are some examples that we can share of supercloud? And finally, we'll answer what you can expect next from us on supercloud? Okay, let's get started. Why do we need another buzzword? Well, late last year, ahead of re:Invent, we were inspired by a post from Jerry Chen called "Castles in the Cloud." Now in that blog post, he introduced the idea that there were sub-markets emerging in cloud that presented opportunities for investors and entrepreneurs that the cloud wasn't going to suck the hyperscalers. Weren't going to suck all the value out of the industry. And so we introduced this notion of supercloud to describe what we saw as a value layer emerging above the hyperscalers CAPEX gift, we sometimes call it. Now it turns out, that we weren't the only ones using the term as both Cornell and MIT have used the phrase in somewhat similar, but different contexts. The point is something new was happening in the AWS and other ecosystems. It was more than IaaS and PaaS, and wasn't just SaaS running in the cloud. It was a new architecture that integrates infrastructure, platform and software as services to solve new problems that the cloud vendors in our view, weren't addressing by themselves. It seemed to us that the ecosystem was pursuing opportunities across clouds that went beyond conventional implementations of multi-cloud. And we felt there was a structural change going on at the industry level, the supercloud, metaphorically was highlighting. So that's the background on why we felt a new catch phrase was warranted, love it or hate it. It's memorable and it's what we chose. Now to that last point about structural industry transformation. Andy Rappaport is sometimes and often credited with identifying the shift from the vertically integrated IBM mainframe era to the fragmented PC microprocesor-based era in his HBR article in 1991. In fact, it was David Moschella, who at the time was an IDC Analyst who first introduced the concept in 1987, four years before Rappaport's article was published. Moschella saw that it was clear that Intel, Microsoft, Seagate and others would replace the system vendors, and put that forth in a graphic that looked similar to the first two on this chart. We don't have to review the shift from IBM as the center of the industry to Wintel, that's well understood. What isn't as well known or accepted is what Moschella put out in his 2018 book called "Seeing Digital" which introduced the idea of "The Matrix" that's shown on the right hand side of this chart. Moschella posited that new services were emerging built on top of the internet and hyperscale clouds that would integrate other innovations and would define the next era of computing. He used the term Matrix because the conceptual depiction included not only horizontal technology rose like the cloud and the internet, but for the first time included connected industry verticals, the columns in this chart. Moschella pointed out that whereas historically, industry verticals had a closed value chain or stack and ecosystem of R&D, and production, and manufacturing, and distribution. And if you were in that industry, the expertise within that vertical generally stayed within that vertical and was critical to success. But because of digital and data, for the first time, companies were able to traverse industries, jump across industries and compete because data enabled them to do that. Examples, Amazon and content, payments, groceries, Apple, and payments, and content, and so forth. There are many examples. Data was now this unifying enabler and this marked a change in the structure of the technology landscape. And supercloud is meant to imply more than running in hyperscale clouds, rather it's the combination of multiple technologies enabled by CloudScale with new industry participants from those verticals, financial services and healthcare, manufacturing, energy, media, and virtually all in any industry. Kind of an extension of every company is a software company. Basically, every company now has the opportunity to build their own cloud or supercloud. And we'll come back to that. Let's first address what's different about superclouds relative to hyperscale clouds? You know, this one's pretty straightforward and obvious, I think. Hyperscale clouds, they're walled gardens where they want your data in their cloud and they want to keep you there. Sure, every cloud player realizes that not all data will go to their particular cloud so they're meeting customers where their data lives with initiatives like Amazon Outposts and Azure Arc, and Google Anthos. But at the end of the day, the more homogeneous they can make their environments, the better control, security, cost, and performance they can deliver. The more complex the environment, the more difficult it is to deliver on their brand promises. And of course, the lesser margin that's left for them to capture. Will the hyperscalers get more serious about cross-cloud services? Maybe, but they have plenty of work to do within their own clouds and within enabling their own ecosystems. They had a long way to go a lot of runway. So let's talk about specifically, what problems superclouds solve? We've all seen the stats from IDC or Gartner, or whomever the customers on average use more than one cloud. You know, two clouds, three clouds, five clouds, 20 clouds. And we know these clouds operate in disconnected silos for the most part. And that's a problem because each cloud requires different skills because the development environment is different as is the operating environment. They have different APIs, different primitives, and different management tools that are optimized for each respective hyperscale cloud. Their functions and value props don't extend to their competitors' clouds for the most part. Why would they? As a result, there's friction when moving between different clouds. It's hard to share data, it's hard to move work. It's hard to secure and govern data. It's hard to enforce organizational edicts and policies across these clouds, and on-prem. Supercloud is an architecture designed to create a single environment that enables management of workloads and data across clouds in an effort to take out complexity, accelerate application development, streamline operations and share data safely, irrespective of location. It's pretty straightforward, but non-trivial, which is why I always ask a company's CEO and executives if stock buybacks and dividends will yield as much return as building out superclouds that solve really specific and hard problems, and create differential value. Okay, let's dig a bit more into the architectural aspects of supercloud. In other words, what are the salient attributes of supercloud? So first and foremost, a supercloud runs a set of specific services designed to solve a unique problem and it can do so in more than one cloud. Superclouds leverage the underlying cloud native tooling of a hyperscale cloud, but they're optimized for a specific objective that aligns with the problem that they're trying to solve. For example, supercloud might be optimized for lowest cost or lowest latency, or sharing data, or governing, or securing that data, or higher performance for networking, for example. But the point is, the collection of services that is being delivered is focused on a unique value proposition that is not being delivered by the hyperscalers across clouds. A supercloud abstracts the underlying and siloed primitives of the native PaaS layer from the hyperscale cloud and then using its own specific platform as a service tooling, creates a common experience across clouds for developers and users. And it does so in a most efficient manner, meaning it has the metadata knowledge and management capabilities that can optimize for latency, bandwidth, or recovery, or data sovereignty, or whatever unique value that supercloud is delivering for the specific use case in their domain. And a supercloud comprises a super PaaS capability that allows ecosystem partners through APIs to add incremental value on top of the supercloud platform to fill gaps, accelerate features, and of course innovate. The services can be infrastructure-related, they could be application services, they could be data services, security services, user services, et cetera, designed and packaged to bring unique value to customers. Again, that hyperscalers are not delivering across clouds or on-premises. Okay, so another common question we get is, isn't that just multi-cloud? And what we'd say to that is yes, but no. You can call it multi-cloud 2.0, if you want, if you want to use it, it's kind of a commonly used rubric. But as Dell's Chuck Whitten proclaimed at Dell Technologies World this year, multi-cloud by design, is different than multi-cloud by default. Meaning to date, multi-cloud has largely been a symptom of what we've called multi-vendor or of M&A, you buy a company and they happen to use Google Cloud, and so you bring it in. And when you look at most so-called, multi-cloud implementations, you see things like an on-prem stack, which is wrapped in a container and hosted on a specific cloud or increasingly a technology vendor has done the work of building a cloud native version of their stack and running it on a specific cloud. But historically, it's been a unique experience within each cloud with virtually no connection between the cloud silos. Supercloud sets out to build incremental value across clouds and above hyperscale CAPEX that goes beyond cloud compatibility within each cloud. So if you want to call it multi-cloud 2.0, that's fine, but we chose to call it supercloud. Okay, so at this point you may be asking, well isn't PaaS already a version of supercloud? And again, we would say no, that supercloud and its corresponding superPaaS layer which is a prerequisite, gives the freedom to store, process and manage, and secure, and connect islands of data across a continuum with a common experience across clouds. And the services offered are specific to that supercloud and will vary by each offering. Your OpenShift, for example, can be used to construct a superPaaS, but in and of itself, isn't a superPaaS, it's generic. A superPaaS might be developed to support, for instance, ultra low latency database work. It would unlikely again, taking the OpenShift example, it's unlikely that off-the-shelf OpenShift would be used to develop such a low latency superPaaS layer for ultra low latency database work. The point is supercloud and its inherent superPaaS will be optimized to solve specific problems like that low latency example for distributed databases or fast backup and recovery for data protection, and ransomware, or data sharing, or data governance. Highly specific use cases that the supercloud is designed to solve for. Okay, another question we often get is who has a supercloud today and who's building a supercloud, and who are the contenders? Well, most companies that consider themselves cloud players will, we believe, be building or are building superclouds. Here's a common ETR graphic that we like to show with Net Score or spending momentum on the Y axis and overlap or pervasiveness in the ETR surveys on the X axis. And we've randomly chosen a number of players that we think are in the supercloud mix, and we've included the hyperscalers because they are enablers. Now remember, this is a spectrum of maturity it's a maturity model and we've added some of those industry players that we see building superclouds like CapitalOne, Goldman Sachs, Walmart. This is in deference to Moschella's observation around The Matrix and the industry structural changes that are going on. This goes back to every company, being a software company and rather than pattern match an outdated SaaS model, we see new industry structures emerging where software and data, and tools, specific to an industry will lead the next wave of innovation and bring in new value that traditional technology companies aren't going to solve, and the hyperscalers aren't going to solve. You know, we've talked a lot about Snowflake's data cloud as an example of supercloud. After being at Snowflake Summit, we're more convinced than ever that they're headed in this direction. VMware is clearly going after cross-cloud services you know, perhaps creating a new category. Basically, every large company we see either pursuing supercloud initiatives or thinking about it. Dell showed project Alpine at Dell Tech World, that's a supercloud. Snowflake introducing a new application development capability based on their superPaaS, our term of course, they don't use the phrase. Mongo, Couchbase, Nutanix, Pure Storage, Veeam, CrowdStrike, Okta, Zscaler. Yeah, all of those guys. Yes, Cisco and HPE. Even though on theCUBE at HPE Discover, Fidelma Russo said on theCUBE, she wasn't a fan of cloaking mechanisms, but then we talked to HPE's Head of Storage Services, Omer Asad is clearly headed in the direction that we would consider supercloud. Again, those cross-cloud services, of course, their emphasis is connecting as well on-prem. That single experience, which traditionally has not existed with multi-cloud or hybrid. And we're seeing the emergence of companies, smaller companies like Aviatrix and Starburst, and Clumio and others that are building versions of superclouds that solve for a specific problem for their customers. Even ISVs like Adobe, ADP, we've talked to UiPath. They seem to be looking at new ways to go beyond the SaaS model and add value within their cloud ecosystem specifically, around data as part of their and their customers digital transformations. So yeah, pretty much every tech vendor with any size or momentum and new industry players are coming out of hiding, and competing. Building superclouds that look a lot like Moschella's Matrix, with machine intelligence and blockchains, and virtual realities, and gaming, all enabled by the internet and hyperscale cloud CAPEX. So it's moving fast and it's the future in our opinion. So don't get too caught up in the past or you'll be left behind. Okay, what about examples? We've given a number in the past, but let's try to be a little bit more specific. Here are a few we've selected and we're going to answer the two questions in one section here. What workloads and services will run in superclouds and what are some examples? Let's start with analytics. Our favorite example is Snowflake, it's one of the furthest along with its data cloud, in our view. It's a supercloud optimized for data sharing and governance, query performance, and security, and ecosystem enablement. When you do things inside of that data cloud, what we call a super data cloud. Again, our term, not theirs. You can do things that you could not do in a single cloud. You can't do this with Redshift, You can't do this with SQL server and they're bringing new data types now with merging analytics or at least accommodate analytics and transaction type data, and bringing open source tooling with things like Apache Iceberg. And so it ticks the boxes we laid out earlier. I would say that a company like Databricks is also in that mix doing it, coming at it from a data science perspective, trying to create that consistent experience for data scientists and data engineering across clouds. Converge databases, running transaction and analytic workloads is another example. Take a look at what Couchbase is doing with Capella and how it's enabling stretching the cloud to the edge with ARM-based platforms and optimizing for low latency across clouds, and even out to the edge. Document database workloads, look at MongoDB, a very developer-friendly platform that with the Atlas is moving toward a supercloud model running document databases very, very efficiently. How about general purpose workloads? This is where VMware comes into to play. Very clearly, there's a need to create a common operating environment across clouds and on-prem, and out to the edge. And I say VMware is hard at work on that. Managing and moving workloads, and balancing workloads, and being able to recover very quickly across clouds for everyday applications. Network routing, take a look at what Aviatrix is doing across clouds, industry workloads. We see CapitalOne, it announced its cost optimization platform for Snowflake, piggybacking on Snowflake supercloud or super data cloud. And in our view, it's very clearly going to go after other markets is going to test it out with Snowflake, running, optimizing on AWS and it's going to expand to other clouds as Snowflake's business and those other clouds grows. Walmart working with Microsoft to create an on-premed Azure experience that's seamless. Yes, that counts, on-prem counts. If you can create that seamless and continuous experience, identical experience from on-prem to a hyperscale cloud, we would include that as a supercloud. You know, we've written about what Goldman is doing. Again, connecting its on-prem data and software tooling, and other capabilities to AWS for scale. And we can bet dollars to donuts that Oracle will be building a supercloud in healthcare with its Cerner acquisition. Supercloud is everywhere you look. So I'm sorry, naysayers it's happening all around us. So what's next? Well, with all the industry buzz and debate about the future, John Furrier and I, have decided to host an event in Palo Alto, we're motivated and inspired to further this conversation. And we welcome all points of view, positive, negative, multi-cloud, supercloud, hypercloud, all welcome. So theCUBE on Supercloud is coming on August 9th, out of our Palo Alto studios, we'll be running a live program on the topic. We've reached out to a number of industry participants, VMware, Snowflake, Confluent, Sky High Security, Gee Rittenhouse's new company, HashiCorp, CloudFlare. We've hit up Red Hat and we expect many of these folks will be in our studios on August 9th. And we've invited a number of industry participants as well that we're excited to have on. From industry, from financial services, from healthcare, from retail, we're inviting analysts, thought leaders, investors. We're going to have more detail in the coming weeks, but for now, if you're interested, please reach out to me or John with how you think you can advance the discussion and we'll see if we can fit you in. So mark your calendars, stay tuned for more information. Okay, that's it for today. Thanks to Alex Myerson who handles production and manages the podcast for Breaking Analysis. And I want to thank Kristen Martin and Cheryl Knight, they help get the word out on social and in our newsletters. And Rob Hof is our editor in chief over at SiliconANGLE, who does a lot of editing and appreciate you posting on SiliconANGLE, Rob. Thanks to all of you. Remember, all these episodes are available as podcasts wherever you listen. All you got to do is search Breaking Analysis podcast. It publish each week on wikibon.com and siliconangle.com. You can email me directly at david.vellante@siliconangle.com or DM me @DVellante, or comment on my LinkedIn post. And please do check out ETR.ai for the best survey data. And the enterprise tech business will be at AWS NYC Summit next Tuesday, July 12th. So if you're there, please do stop by and say hello to theCUBE, it's at the Javits Center. This is Dave Vellante for theCUBE insights powered by ETR. Thanks for watching. And we'll see you next time on "Breaking Analysis." (bright music)

>> From theCUBE Studios in Palo Alto and Boston, bringing you data-driven insights from theCUBE and ETR. This is "Breaking Analysis" with Dave Vallante. >> Welcome to this week's Wikibon CUBE Insights powered by ETR. As we exited the isolation economy last year, Supercloud is a term that we introduced to describe something new that was happening in the world of cloud. In this "Breaking Analysis," we address the 10 most frequently asked questions we get around Supercloud. Okay, let's review these frequently asked questions on Supercloud that we're going to try to answer today. Look at an industry that's full of hype and buzzwords. Why the hell does anyone need a new term? Aren't hyperscalers building out Superclouds? We'll try to answer why the term Supercloud connotes something different from hyperscale clouds. And we'll talk about the problems that Superclouds solve specifically, and we'll further define the critical aspects of a Supercloud architecture. We often get asked, "Isn't this just multi-cloud?" Well, we don't think so, and we'll explain why in this "Breaking Analysis." Now, in an earlier episode, we introduced the notion of super PaaS. Well, isn't a plain vanilla PaaS already a super PaaS? Again, we don't think so, and we'll explain why. Who will actually build and who are the players currently building Superclouds? What workloads and services will run on Superclouds? And eight A or number nine, what are some examples that we can share of Supercloud? And finally, we'll answer what you can expect next from us on Supercloud. Okay, let's get started. Why do we need another buzzword? Well, late last year ahead of re:Invent, we were inspired by a post from Jerry Chen called castles in the cloud. Now, in that blog post, he introduced the idea that there were submarkets emerging in cloud that presented opportunities for investors and entrepreneurs. That the cloud wasn't going to suck the hyperscalers, weren't going to suck all the value out of the industry. And so we introduced this notion of Supercloud to describe what we saw as a value layer emerging above the hyperscalers CAPEX gift, we sometimes call it. Now, it turns out that we weren't the only ones using the term, as both Cornell and MIT, have used the phrase in somewhat similar, but different contexts. The point is, something new was happening in the AWS and other ecosystems. It was more than IS and PaaS, and wasn't just SaaS running in the cloud. It was a new architecture that integrates infrastructure, platform and software as services, to solve new problems that the cloud vendors, in our view, weren't addressing by themselves. It seemed to us that the ecosystem was pursuing opportunities across clouds that went beyond conventional implementations of multi-cloud. And we felt there was a structural change going on at the industry level. The Supercloud metaphorically was highlighting. So that's the background on why we felt a new catch phrase was warranted. Love it or hate it, it's memorable and it's what we chose. Now, to that last point about structural industry transformation. Andy Rapaport is sometimes and often credited with identifying the shift from the vertically integrated IBM mainframe era to the fragmented PC microprocesor based era in his HBR article in 1991. In fact, it was David Moschella, who at the time was an IDC analyst who first introduced the concept in 1987, four years before Rapaport's article was published. Moschella saw that it was clear that Intel, Microsoft, Seagate and others would replace the system vendors and put that forth in a graphic that looked similar to the first two on this chart. We don't have to review the shift from IBM as the center of the industry to Wintel. That's well understood. What isn't as well known or accepted is what Moschella put out in his 2018 book called "Seeing Digital" which introduced the idea of the matrix that's shown on the right hand side of this chart. Moschella posited that new services were emerging, built on top of the internet and hyperscale clouds that would integrate other innovations and would define the next era of computing. He used the term matrix, because the conceptual depiction included, not only horizontal technology rows, like the cloud and the internet, but for the first time included connected industry verticals, the columns in this chart. Moschella pointed out that, whereas historically, industry verticals had a closed value chain or stack and ecosystem of R&D and production and manufacturing and distribution. And if you were in that industry, the expertise within that vertical generally stayed within that vertical and was critical to success. But because of digital and data, for the first time, companies were able to traverse industries jump across industries and compete because data enabled them to do that. Examples, Amazon and content, payments, groceries, Apple and payments, and content and so forth. There are many examples. Data was now this unifying enabler and this marked a change in the structure of the technology landscape. And Supercloud is meant to imply more than running in hyperscale clouds. Rather, it's the combination of multiple technologies, enabled by cloud scale with new industry participants from those verticals; financial services, and healthcare, and manufacturing, energy, media, and virtually all and any industry. Kind of an extension of every company is a software company. Basically, every company now has the opportunity to build their own cloud or Supercloud. And we'll come back to that. Let's first address what's different about Superclouds relative to hyperscale clouds. Now, this one's pretty straightforward and obvious, I think. Hyperscale clouds, they're walled gardens where they want your data in their cloud and they want to keep you there. Sure, every cloud player realizes that not all data will go to their particular cloud. So they're meeting customers where their data lives with initiatives like Amazon Outposts and Azure Arc and Google Antos. But at the end of the day, the more homogeneous they can make their environments, the better control, security, costs, and performance they can deliver. The more complex the environment, the more difficult it is to deliver on their brand promises. And, of course, the less margin that's left for them to capture. Will the hyperscalers get more serious about cross cloud services? Maybe, but they have plenty of work to do within their own clouds and within enabling their own ecosystems. They have a long way to go, a lot of runway. So let's talk about specifically, what problems Superclouds solve. We've all seen the stats from IDC or Gartner or whomever, that customers on average use more than one cloud, two clouds, three clouds, five clouds, 20 clouds. And we know these clouds operate in disconnected silos for the most part. And that's a problem, because each cloud requires different skills, because the development environment is different as is the operating environment. They have different APIs, different primitives, and different management tools that are optimized for each respective hyperscale cloud. Their functions and value props don't extend to their competitors' clouds for the most part. Why would they? As a result, there's friction when moving between different clouds. It's hard to share data. It's hard to move work. It's hard to secure and govern data. It's hard to enforce organizational edicts and policies across these clouds and on-prem. Supercloud is an architecture designed to create a single environment that enables management of workloads and data across clouds in an effort to take out complexity, accelerate application development, streamline operations, and share data safely, irrespective of location. It's pretty straightforward, but non-trivial, which is why I always ask a company's CEO and executives if stock buybacks and dividends will yield as much return as building out Superclouds that solve really specific and hard problems and create differential value. Okay, let's dig a bit more into the architectural aspects of Supercloud. In other words, what are the salient attributes of Supercloud? So, first and foremost, a Supercloud runs a set of specific services designed to solve a unique problem, and it can do so in more than one cloud. Superclouds leverage the underlying cloud native tooling of a hyperscale cloud, but they're optimized for a specific objective that aligns with the problem that they're trying to solve. For example, Supercloud might be optimized for lowest cost or lowest latency or sharing data or governing or securing that data or higher performance for networking, for example. But the point is, the collection of services that is being delivered is focused on a unique value proposition that is not being delivered by the hyperscalers across clouds. A Supercloud abstracts the underlying and siloed primitives of the native PaaS layer from the hyperscale cloud, and then using its own specific platform as a service tooling, creates a common experience across clouds for developers and users. And it does so in the most efficient manner, meaning it has the metadata knowledge and management capabilities that can optimize for latency, bandwidth, or recovery or data sovereignty, or whatever unique value that Supercloud is delivering for the specific use case in their domain. And a Supercloud comprises a super PaaS capability that allows ecosystem partners through APIs to add incremental value on top of the Supercloud platform to fill gaps, accelerate features, and of course, innovate. The services can be infrastructure related, they could be application services, they could be data services, security services, user services, et cetera, designed and packaged to bring unique value to customers. Again, that hyperscalers are not delivering across clouds or on premises. Okay, so another common question we get is, "Isn't that just multi-cloud?" And what we'd say to that is yeah, "Yes, but no." You can call it multi-cloud 2.0, if you want. If you want to use, it's kind of a commonly used rubric. But as Dell's Chuck Whitten proclaimed at Dell Technologies World this year, multi-cloud, by design, is different than multi-cloud by default. Meaning, to date, multi-cloud has largely been a symptom of what we've called multi-vendor or of M&A. You buy a company and they happen to use Google cloud. And so you bring it in. And when you look at most so-called multi-cloud implementations, you see things like an on-prem stack, which is wrapped in a container and hosted on a specific cloud. Or increasingly, a technology vendor has done the work of building a cloud native version of their stack and running it on a specific cloud. But historically, it's been a unique experience within each cloud, with virtually no connection between the cloud silos. Supercloud sets out to build incremental value across clouds and above hyperscale CAPEX that goes beyond cloud compatibility within each cloud. So, if you want to call it multi-cloud 2.0, that's fine, but we chose to call it Supercloud. Okay, so at this point you may be asking, "Well isn't PaaS already a version of Supercloud?" And again, we would say, "No." That Supercloud and its corresponding super PaaS layer, which is a prerequisite, gives the freedom to store, process, and manage and secure and connect islands of data across a continuum with a common experience across clouds. And the services offered are specific to that Supercloud and will vary by each offering. OpenShift, for example, can be used to construct a super PaaS, but in and of itself, isn't a super PaaS, it's generic. A super PaaS might be developed to support, for instance, ultra low latency database work. It would unlikely, again, taking the OpenShift example, it's unlikely that off the shelf OpenShift would be used to develop such a low latency, super PaaS layer for ultra low latency database work. The point is, Supercloud and its inherent super PaaS will be optimized to solve specific problems like that low latency example for distributed databases or fast backup in recovery for data protection and ransomware, or data sharing or data governance. Highly specific use cases that the Supercloud is designed to solve for. Okay, another question we often get is, "Who has a Supercloud today and who's building a Supercloud and who are the contenders?" Well, most companies that consider themselves cloud players will, we believe, be building or are building Superclouds. Here's a common ETR graphic that we like to show with net score or spending momentum on the Y axis, and overlap or pervasiveness in the ETR surveys on the X axis. And we've randomly chosen a number of players that we think are in the Supercloud mix. And we've included the hyperscalers because they are enablers. Now, remember, this is a spectrum of maturity. It's a maturity model. And we've added some of those industry players that we see building Superclouds like Capital One, Goldman Sachs, Walmart. This is in deference to Moschella's observation around the matrix and the industry structural changes that are going on. This goes back to every company being a software company. And rather than pattern match and outdated SaaS model, we see new industry structures emerging where software and data and tools specific to an industry will lead the next wave of innovation and bring in new value that traditional technology companies aren't going to solve. And the hyperscalers aren't going to solve. We've talked a lot about Snowflake's data cloud as an example of Supercloud. After being at Snowflake Summit, we're more convinced than ever that they're headed in this direction. VMware is clearly going after cross cloud services, perhaps creating a new category. Basically, every large company we see either pursuing Supercloud initiatives or thinking about it. Dell showed Project Alpine at Dell Tech World. That's a Supercloud. Snowflake introducing a new application development capability based on their super PaaS, our term, of course. They don't use the phrase. Mongo, Couchbase, Nutanix, Pure Storage, Veeam, CrowdStrike, Okta, Zscaler. Yeah, all of those guys. Yes, Cisco and HPE. Even though on theCUBE at HPE Discover, Fidelma Russo said on theCUBE, she wasn't a fan of cloaking mechanisms. (Dave laughing) But then we talked to HPE's head of storage services, Omer Asad, and he's clearly headed in the direction that we would consider Supercloud. Again, those cross cloud services, of course, their emphasis is connecting as well on-prem. That single experience, which traditionally has not existed with multi-cloud or hybrid. And we're seeing the emergence of smaller companies like Aviatrix and Starburst and Clumio and others that are building versions of Superclouds that solve for a specific problem for their customers. Even ISVs like Adobe, ADP, we've talked to UiPath. They seem to be looking at new ways to go beyond the SaaS model and add value within their cloud ecosystem, specifically around data as part of their and their customer's digital transformations. So yeah, pretty much every tech vendor with any size or momentum, and new industry players are coming out of hiding and competing, building Superclouds that look a lot like Moschella's matrix, with machine intelligence and blockchains and virtual realities and gaming, all enabled by the internet and hyperscale cloud CAPEX. So it's moving fast and it's the future in our opinion. So don't get too caught up in the past or you'll be left behind. Okay, what about examples? We've given a number in the past but let's try to be a little bit more specific. Here are a few we've selected and we're going to answer the two questions in one section here. What workloads and services will run in Superclouds and what are some examples? Let's start with analytics. Our favorite example of Snowflake. It's one of the furthest along with its data cloud, in our view. It's a Supercloud optimized for data sharing and governance, and query performance, and security, and ecosystem enablement. When you do things inside of that data cloud, what we call a super data cloud. Again, our term, not theirs. You can do things that you could not do in a single cloud. You can't do this with Redshift. You can't do this with SQL server. And they're bringing new data types now with merging analytics or at least accommodate analytics and transaction type data and bringing open source tooling with things like Apache Iceberg. And so, it ticks the boxes we laid out earlier. I would say that a company like Databricks is also in that mix, doing it, coming at it from a data science perspective trying to create that consistent experience for data scientists and data engineering across clouds. Converge databases, running transaction and analytic workloads is another example. Take a look at what Couchbase is doing with Capella and how it's enabling stretching the cloud to the edge with arm based platforms and optimizing for low latency across clouds, and even out to the edge. Document database workloads, look at Mongo DB. A very developer friendly platform that where the Atlas is moving toward a Supercloud model, running document databases very, very efficiently. How about general purpose workloads? This is where VMware comes into play. Very clearly, there's a need to create a common operating environment across clouds and on-prem and out to the edge. And I say, VMware is hard at work on that, managing and moving workloads and balancing workloads, and being able to recover very quickly across clouds for everyday applications. Network routing, take a look at what Aviatrix is doing across clouds. Industry workloads, we see Capital One. It announced its cost optimization platform for Snowflake, piggybacking on Snowflake's Supercloud or super data cloud. And in our view, it's very clearly going to go after other markets. It's going to test it out with Snowflake, optimizing on AWS, and it's going to expand to other clouds as Snowflake's business and those other clouds grows. Walmart working with Microsoft to create an on-premed Azure experience that's seamless. Yes, that counts, on-prem counts. If you can create that seamless and continuous experience, identical experience from on-prem to a hyperscale cloud, we would include that as a Supercloud. We've written about what Goldman is doing. Again, connecting its on-prem data and software tooling, and other capabilities to AWS for scale. And you can bet dollars to donuts that Oracle will be building a Supercloud in healthcare with its Cerner acquisition. Supercloud is everywhere you look. So I'm sorry, naysayers, it's happening all around us. So what's next? Well, with all the industry buzz and debate about the future, John Furrier and I have decided to host an event in Palo Alto. We're motivated and inspired to further this conversation. And we welcome all points of view, positive, negative, multi-cloud, Supercloud, HyperCloud, all welcome. So theCUBE on Supercloud is coming on August 9th out of our Palo Alto studios. We'll be running a live program on the topic. We've reached out to a number of industry participants; VMware, Snowflake, Confluent, Skyhigh Security, G. Written House's new company, HashiCorp, CloudFlare. We've hit up Red Hat and we expect many of these folks will be in our studios on August 9th. And we've invited a number of industry participants as well that we're excited to have on. From industry, from financial services, from healthcare, from retail, we're inviting analysts, thought leaders, investors. We're going to have more detail in the coming weeks, but for now, if you're interested, please reach out to me or John with how you think you can advance the discussion, and we'll see if we can fit you in. So mark your calendars, stay tuned for more information. Okay, that's it for today. Thanks to Alex Myerson who handles production and manages the podcast for "Breaking Analysis." And I want to thank Kristen Martin and Cheryl Knight. They help get the word out on social and in our newsletters. And Rob Hof is our editor in chief over at SiliconANGLE, who does a lot of editing and appreciate you posting on SiliconANGLE, Rob. Thanks to all of you. Remember, all these episodes are available as podcasts wherever you listen. All you got to do is search, breaking analysis podcast. I publish each week on wikibon.com and siliconangle.com. Or you can email me directly at david.vellante@siliconangle.com. Or DM me @DVallante, or comment on my LinkedIn post. And please, do check out etr.ai for the best survey data in the enterprise tech business. We'll be at AWS NYC summit next Tuesday, July 12th. So if you're there, please do stop by and say hello to theCUBE. It's at the Javits Center. This is Dave Vallante for theCUBE Insights, powered by ETR. Thanks for watching. And we'll see you next time on "Breaking Analysis." (slow music)

>>The cube presents HPE discover 2022 brought to you by HPE. >>Welcome back to the Cube's coverage. We're wrapping up day two, John furrier and Dave ante. We got some friends and colleagues, longtime friends, Crawford Del Pret is the president of IDC. Matt Eastwood is the senior vice president of infrastructure and cloud guys. Thanks for coming on spending time. Great to you guys. >>That's fun to do it. Awesome. >>Cravin I want to ask you, I, I think this correct me if I'm wrong, but this was your first physical directions as, as president. Is that true or did you do one in 2019? >>Uh, no, we did one in 20. We did, we did one in 20. I was president at the time and then, and then everything started, >>Well, how was directions this year? You must have been stoked to get back together. Yeah, >>It was great. I mean, it was actually pretty emotional, you know, it's, it's a community, right? I mean, we have a lot of customers that have been coming to that event for a long, long time and to stand up on the stage and look out and see people, you know, getting a little bit emotional and a lot of hugs and a lot of bringing people together. And this year in Boston, we were the first event really of any size that kind of came back. And when I kind of didn't see that coming in terms of how people, how ready people were to be together. Cause >>When did you did it April >>In Boston? Yeah, we did it March in March. Yeah, it was, it was, it was, it was a game day decision. I mean, we were, we had negotiated it, we were going back and forth and then I kind of made the call at the last minute, say, let's go and do it. And in Santa Clara, I felt like we were kind of opening up the crypt at the convention center. I mean, all the production people said, you know what? You guys were really the first event to be back. And attendance was really strong. You know, we, we, we got over a thousand. It was, it was really good. >>Good. It's always a fun when I was there. It was, it's a big deal. You guys prepare for it. Yeah. Some new faces up on the stage. Yeah. So, so Matt, um, you've been doing the circuit. I take it like, like all top analysts, super busy. Right. This is kind of end of the spring. I mean, I know it's summer, right. That's right. But, um, how do you look at, at discover relative some, some of the other events you've been at? >>So I think if you go back to what Crawford was just talking about our event in March, I mean, March was sort of the, the reopening and there was, I think people just felt so happy to be, to be back out there. You still get a little bit at, at these events. I mean, cuz for each, each company it's their first time back at it, but I think we're starting to get down what these events are gonna feel like going forward. Um, and it, I mean, there's good energy here. There's been a good attendance. I think the, the interest in getting back live and having face to face meetings is clearly strong. >>Yeah. I mean, this definitely shows that hybrids, the steady state, both events cloud. Yeah. Virtualization remotes. So what are you guys seeing with that hybrid mode? Just from a workforce, certainly people excited to get back together, but it's gonna continue. You're starting to see that digital piece. How is that impacting some of the, some of the customers you're tracking, who's winning and who's losing, coming out of the pandemic. What's the big picture look like? >>Yeah. I mean, if you, if you take a look at hybrid work, um, people are testing many, many, many different models. And I think as we move from a pandemic to an em, we're gonna have just waves and waves and waves of people needing that flexibility for a lot of different reasons, whether they have, uh, you know, preexisting conditions, whether they're just not comfortable, whether they have people who can't be vaccinated at home. So I think we're gonna be in this hybrid work for a long, long time. I do think though that we are gonna transition back into some kind of a normal, um, and I, and I think the big difference is that I think leaders back in the day, a long time ago, when people weren't coming into work, it was kind of like, oh, I know nothing's going on there. People aren't getting worked. And I think we're over that stage. Yeah. I think we're now into a stage where we know people can be productive. We know people can effectively work from home and now we're into the reason to be in the office. And the reason to be in the office is that collaboration, it's that mentoring it's that, you know, think about your 25 year old self. Do you wanna be staring at a windshield all day long and not kind of building those relationships? People want face to face, it's difficult. They want face >>To face and I would, and you guys had a great culture and it's a young culture. How are you handling it as an executive in terms of, is there a policy for hybrid or >>Yeah, so, so, so at IDC, what we did is we're in a pilot period and we've kind of said that the summertime is gonna be a pilot period and we've asked people, we're actually serving shocker, we're >>Serving, >>But we're, but we're, but, but we're actually asking people to work with their manager on what works for them. And then we'll come up with, you know, whether you are in, out of the office worker, which will be less than two days a hybrid worker, which will be three days or, uh, in, in the office, which is more than three days a week. And you know, we all know there's, there's, there's limitation, there's, there's, there's variability in that, but that's kind of what we're shooting for. And we'd like to be able to have that in place in the fall. >>Are you pretty much there? >>Yeah, I am. I, I am there three days a week. I I, Mondays and Fridays, unless, >>Because you got the CEO radius, right? Yeah. >><laugh>, <laugh> >>The same way I'm in the office, the smaller, smaller office. But so, uh, let's talk a little bit about the, the numbers we were chatting earlier, trying to squint through you guys are, you know, obviously the gold standard for what the market does, what happened in, you know, during the pandemic, what happened in 2021 and what do you expect to happen in, in 2022 in terms of it spending growth? >>Yeah. So this is, this is a crazy time, right? We've never seen this. You and I have a long history of, uh, of tracking this. So we saw in, in, in, in 2020, the market decelerated dramatically, um, the GDP went down to a negative like it always does in these cases, it was, you know, probably negative six in that, in that, in that kind of range for the first time, since I've been tracking it, which goes back over 30 years, tech didn't go negative tech went to about just under 3%. And then as we went to 2021, we saw, you know, everything kind of snap back, we saw tech go up to about 11% growth. And then of course we saw, you know, GDP come back to about a 4%, you know, ki kind of range growth. Now what's I think the story there is that companies and you saw this anecdotally everywhere companies leaned into tech, uh, company. >>You know, I think, you know, Matt, you have a great statistic that, you know, 80% of companies used COVID as their point to pivot into digital transformation, right. And to invest in a different way. And so what we saw now is that tech is now where I think companies need to focus. They need to invest in tech. They need to make people more productive with tech and it played out in the numbers now. So this year what's fascinating is we're looking at two Fastly different markets. We've got gasoline at $7 a gallon. We've got that affecting food prices. Uh, interesting fun fact recently it now costs over $1,000 to fill an 18 Wheeler. All right. Based on, I mean this just kind of can't continue. So you think about it, don't put the boat >>In the wall. Yeah. Yeah. >>Good, good, good, good luck. It's good. Yeah, exactly. <laugh> so a family has kind of this bag of money, right? And that bag of money goes up by maybe three, 4% every year, depending upon earnings. So that is sort of sloshing around. So if food and fuel and rent is taking up more gadgets and consumer tech are not, you know, you're gonna use that iPhone a little longer. You're gonna use that Android phone a little longer. You're gonna use that TV a little longer. So consumer tech is getting crushed, you know, really it's very, very, and you saw it immediately and ad spending, you've seen it in meta. You've seen it in Facebook. Consumer tech is doing very, very it's tough enterprise tech. We haven't been in the office for two and a half years. We haven't upgraded whether that be campus wifi, whether that be, uh, servers, whether that be, uh, commercial PCs, as much as we would have. So enterprise tech, we're seeing double digit order rates. We're seeing strong, strong demand. Um, we have combined that with a component shortage and you're seeing some enterprise companies with a quarter of backlog. I mean, that's, you know, really unheard at higher >>Prices, which >>Also, and therefore that drives that >>Drives. It shouldn't be that way. If there's a shortage of chips, it shouldn't be that way, >>But it is, but it is, but it is. And then you look at software and we saw this, you know, we've seen this in previous cycles, but we really saw it in the COVID downturn where, uh, in software, the stickiness of SaaS means that you just, you're not gonna take that stuff out. So the, the second half of last year we saw double digit rates in software surprise. We're seeing high single digit revenue growth in software now, so that we think is gonna sustain, which means that overall it demand. We expect to be between five and 6% this year. Okay, fine. We have a war going on. We have, you know, potentially, uh, a recession. We think if we do, it'll be with a lower case, R maybe you see a banded down to maybe 4% growth, but it's gonna grow this. >>Is it, is it both the structural change of the disruption of COVID plus the digital transformation yeah. Together? Or is it, >>I, I think you make a great point. Um, I, I, I think that we are entering a new era for tech. I think that, you know, Andrew's famous wall street journal oped 10 years ago, software is even world was absolutely correct. And now we're finding that software is, is eing into every nook and cranny people have to invest. They, they know disruptors are coming around every single corner. And if I'm not leaning into digital transformation, I'm dead. So >>The number of players in tech is, is growing, >>Cuz there's well, the number of players in tech number >>Industry's coming >>In. Yeah. The industry's coming in. So I think the interesting dynamic you're gonna see there is now we have high interest rates. Yeah. Which means that the price of funding these companies and buying them and putting data on is gonna get higher and higher, which means that I think you could, you could see another wave of consolidation. Mm-hmm <affirmative> because tech large install based tech companies are saying, oh, you know what? I like that now >>4 0 9 S are being reset too. That's another point. >>Yeah. I mean, so if you think about this, this transformation, right. So it's all about apps, absent data and differentiating and absent data. What the, the big winner the last couple years was cloud. And I would just say that if this is the first potential recession that we're talking about, where the cloud service providers. So I think a cloud as an operating model, not necessarily a destination, but for these cloud service providers, they've actually never experienced a slowdown. So how, and, and if you think about the numbers, 30% of, of the typical it budget is now quote, unquote cloud and 30% of all expenditures are it related. So there's a lot of exposure there. And I think you're gonna see a lot of, a lot of focus on how we can rationalize some of those investments. >>Well, that's a great point. I want to just double click on that. So yeah, the cloud did well during the pandemic. We saw that with SAS, have you guys tracked like the Tams of what got pulled forward? So the bit, a big discussion about something that pulled forward because of the pandemic, um, like zoom, for instance, obviously everyone's using zoom. Yeah, yeah, yeah. Was there fake Tams? There was one, uh, couple analysts who were pointing out that some companies were hot during the pandemic will go away that that Tam doesn't really exist, but there's some that got pulled forward early. That's where the growth is. So is there a, is there a line between the, I call fake Tam or pulled forward TA that was only for the pandemic situationally, um, devices might be like virtual event, virtual event. Software was one, I know Hoppin got laid a lot of layoffs. And so that was kind of gone coming, coming and going. And you got SAS which got pulled forward. Yep. And it's not going away, but it's >>Sustaining. Yeah. Yeah. But it's, but, but it's sustaining, um, you know, I definitely think there was a, there was a lot of spending that absolutely got pulled forward. And I think it's really about CEO's ability to control expectations and to kind of message what it, what it looks like. Um, you know, I think I look, I, I, I think virtual event platforms probably have a role. I think you can, you can definitely, you know, raise your margins in the event, business, significantly using those platforms. There's a role for them. But if you were out there thinking that this thing was gonna continue, then you know, that that was unrealistic, you know, Dave, to, to your point on devices, I'm not necessarily, you know. Sure. I think, I think we definitely got ahead of our expectations and things like consumer PCs, those things will go back to historical growth >>Rates. Yeah. I mean, you got the install base is pretty young right now, but I think the one way to look at it too, is there was some technical debt brought in because people didn't necessarily expect that we'd be moving to a permanent hybrid state two years ago. So now we have to actually invest on both. We have to make, create a little bit more permanency around the hybrid world. And then also like Crawford's talking about the permanency of, of having an office and having people work in, in multiple modes. Yeah. It actually requires investment in both the office. And >>Also, so you're saying operationally, you gotta run the company and do the digital transformation to level up the hybrid. >>Yeah. Yeah. Just the way people work. Right. So, so, you know, you basically have to, I mean, even for like us internally, Crawford was saying, we're experimenting with what works for us. My team before the pandemic was like one third virtual. Now it's two third virtual, which means that all of our internal meetings are gonna be on, on teams or zoom. Right. Yeah. They're not gonna necessarily be, Hey, just coming to the office today, cuz two thirds of people aren't in the Boston area. >>Right. Matt, you said if you see cloud as an operating model, not necessarily a place. I remember when you were out, I was in the, on the, on the, on the zoom when, when first met Adam Celski yeah. Um, he said, you were asking him about, you know, the, the on-prem guys and he's like, nah, it's not cloud. And he kind of was very dismissive of it. Yeah. Yeah. I wanna get your take on, you know, what we're seeing with as Azure service GreenLake, apex, Cisco's got their version. IBM. Fewer is doing it. Is that cloud. >>I think if it's, I, I don't think all of it is by default. I think it is. If I actually think what HPE is doing is cloud, because it's really about how you present the services and how you allow customers to engage with the platform. So they're actually creating a cloud model. I think a lot of people get lost in the transition from, you know, CapEx to OPEX and the financing element of this. But the reality is what HPE is doing and they're sort of setting the standard. I think for the industry here is actually setting up what I would consider a cloud model. >>Well, in the early days of, of GreenLake, for sure it was more of a financial, you >>Know, it was kind of bespoke, right. But now you've got 70 services. And so you can, you can build that out. But >>You know, we were talking to Keith Townsend right after the keynote and we were sort of UN unpacking it a little bit. And I, I asked the question, you know, if you, if you had to pin this in terms of AWS's maturity, where are we? And the consensus was 2014 console filling, is that fair or unfair? >>Oh, that's a good question. I mean, um, I think it's, well, clouds come a long way, right? So it'd be, I, I, I think 20, fourteen's probably a little bit too far back because >>You have more modern tools I Kubernetes is. Yeah. >>And, but you also have, I would say the market still getting to a point of, of, of readiness and in terms of buying this way. So if you think about the HP's kind of strategy around edge, the core platform as a, as a service, you know, we're all big believers in edge and the apps follow the data and the data's being created in new locations and you gotta put the infrastructure there. And for an end user, there's a lot of risk there because they don't know how to actually plan for capacity at the edge. So they're gonna look to offload that, but this is a long term play to actually, uh, build out and deploy at the edge. It's not gonna happen tomorrow. It's a five, 10 year play. >>Yeah. I mean, I like the operating model. I'd agree with you, Matt, that if it's, if it's cloud operations, DevSecOps and all that, all that jazz it's cloud it's cloud operating and, and, and public cloud is a public cloud hyperscaler on premise. And the storage folks were presented. That's a single pane of glass. That's old school concepts, but cloud based. Yep. Shipping hardwares, auto figures. Yeah. That's the kind of consumption they're going for now. I like it. Then I, then they got the partner led thing is the partner piece. How do you guys see that? Because if I'm a partner, there's two things, wait a minute, am I at bottleneck to the direct self-service? Or is that an enabler to get more cash, to make more money? If I'm a partner. Cause you see what Essentia's doing with what they do with Amazon and Deloitte and et C. Yeah. You know, it's interesting, right? Like they've a channel partner, I'm making more cash. >>Yeah. I mean, well, and those channel partners are all in transition too. They're trying to yeah. Right. Figure out. Right, right. Are they, you know, what are their managed services gonna look like? You know, what kind of applications are they gonna stand up? They're they're not gonna just be >>Reselling, bought a big house in a boat. The box is not selling. I wanna ask you guys about growth because you know, the big three cloud, big four growing pick a number, I dunno, 30, 35% revenue big. And like you said, it's 30% of the business now. I think Dell's growing double digits. I don't know how much of that is sustainable. A lot of that is PCs, but still strong growth. Yep. I think Cisco has promised 9% >>In, in that. Right, right. >>About that. Something like that. I think IBM Arvin is at 6%. Yep. And I think HPE has said, Hey, we're gonna do three to 4%. Right. Which is so really sort of lagging and which I think a lot of people in wall street is like, okay, well that's not necessarily so compelling. Right. What does HPE have to do to double that growth? Or even triple that growth. >>Yeah. So they're gonna need, so, so obviously you're right. I mean, being able to show growth is Tanem out to this company getting, you know, more attention, more heat from, from investors. I think that they're rightly pointing to the triple digit growth that they've seen on green lake. I think if you look at the trailing, you know, 12 month bookings, you got over, you know, 7 billion, which means that in a year, you're gonna have a significant portion of the company is as a service. And you're gonna see that revenue that's rat being, you know, recognized over a series of months. So I think that this is sort of the classic SAS trough that we've seen applied to an infrastructure company where you're basically have to kind of be in the desert for a long time. But if they can, I think the most important number for HPE right now is that GreenLake booking snow. >>And if you look at that number and you see that number, you know, rapidly come down, which it hasn't, I mean off a very large number, you're still in triple digits. They will ultimately start to show revenue growth, um, in the business. And I think the one thing people are missing about HPE is there aren't, there are a lot of companies that want to build a platform, but they're small and nobody cares. And nobody let's say they throw a party and nobody comes. HP has such a significant installed base that if they do build a platform, they can attract partners to that platform. What I mean by that is partners that deliver services on GreenLake that they're not delivering. They have the girth to really start to change an industry and change the way stuff is being built. And that's the be they're making. And frankly, they are showing progress in that direction. >>So I buy that. But the one thing that concerns me is they kind of hide the ball on services. Right. And I, and I worry about that is like, is this a services kind of just, you know, same wine, new bottle or, >>Or, yeah. So, so I, I, I would argue that it's not about hiding the ball. It's about eliminating confusion of the marketplace. This is the company that bought EDS only to spin it off <laugh>. Okay. And so you don't wanna have a situation where you're getting back into services. >>Yeah. They're the only one >>They're product, not the only ones who does, I mean, look at the way IBM used to count and still >>I get it. I get it. But I think it's, it's really about clarity of mission. Well, I point next they are in the Ts business, absolutely. Point of it. It's important prop >>Drive for them at the top. Right. The global 50 say there's still a lot of uniqueness in what they want to buy. So there's definitely a lot of bespoke kind of delivery. That's still happening there. The real promise here is when you get into the global 2000 and yeah. And can start them to getting them to consume very standardized offers. And then the margins are, are healthy >>And they got they're what? Below 30, 33, 30 3%. I think 34% last quarter gross margin. Yeah. That that's solid. Just compare that with Dell is, I don't know. They're happy with 20, 21% of correct. You get that, which is, you know, I I'll come back. Go ahead. I want, I wanna ask >>Guys. No, I wanna, I wanna just, he said one thing I like, which was, I think he nailed it. They have such, um, big install base. They have a great channel. They know how to use it. Right. That's a real asset. Yeah. And Microsoft, I remember when their stock was trading at 26 when Baltimore was CEO. Yep. What they did with no, they had office and windows, so a little bit different. Yep. But similar strategy, leverage our install base, bring something up to them. That's what you're kind of connecting the >>Absolutely. You have this velocity, uh, machine with a significant girth that you can now move to a new model. They move that to a new model. To Matt's point. They lead the industry, they change the way large swath the customers buy and you will see it in steady revenue growth over time. Okay. So I just in that, well, >>So your point is the focus and there the right it's the right focus. And I would agree what's >>What's the other move. What's their other move, >>The problem. Triple digit booking growth off a number that gets bigger >>Inspired. Okay. >>Whats what's the scoreboard. Okay. Now they're go at the growth. That's the scoreboard. What are the signals? Are you looking at on the scoreboard Crawford and Matt in terms of success? What are the benchmarks? Is it ecosystem growth, number of services, triple growth. Yeah. What's the, what are some of the metrics that you guys are gonna be watching and we should be watching? >>Yeah. I mean, I dunno if >>You wanna jump in, I mean, I think ecosystem's really critical. Yeah. You want to, you want to have well and, and you need to sell both ways like HPE needs to be selling their technology on other cloud providers and vice versa. You need to have the VMs of the world on, you know, offering services on your platform and, and kind of capturing some, some motion off that. I think that's pretty critical. The channel definitely. I mean, you have to help and what you're gonna see happen there is there will be channel partners that succeed in transforming and succeeding and there'll be a lot that go away and that some, some of that's, uh, generational there'll be people that just kind of age outta the system and, and just go home. >>Yeah. Yeah. So I would argue it's, it's, it's, it's gonna be, uh, bookings growth rate. It's gonna be retention rate of the, of, of, of the customers, uh, that they have. And then it's gonna be that, that, um, you know, ultimately you're gonna see revenue, um, growth, and which is that revenue growth is gonna have to be correlated to the booking's growth for green lake cross. >>What's the Achilles heel on, on HPE. If you had to do the SWAT, what's the, what's the w for HPE that they really need to pay >>Attention to. I mean, they, they need to continue their relentless focus on cost, particularly in the, in the core compute, you know, segment they need to be, they need to be able to be as cost effective as possible while the higher profit dollars associated with GreenLake and other services come in and then increase the overall operating margin and gross margin >>Picture for the, I mean, I think the biggest thing is they just have, they have to continue the motion that they've been on. Right. And they've been consistent about that. Mm-hmm, <affirmative> what you see where others have, have kind of slipped up is when you go to, to customers and you present the, the OPEX as a service and the traditional CapEx side by side, and the customers put in this position of trying to detangle what's in that OPEX service, you don't wanna do that obviously. And, and HP has not done that, but we've seen others kind of slip up. And, but >>A lot of companies still wanna buy CapEx. Right. Absolutely liquid. And, and I think, >>But you shouldn't do a, you shouldn't do that bake off by putting those two offers out. You should basically ascertain what they want to do. >>What's kind of what Dell does. Right. Hey, how, what do you want? We got this, we got >>This on one hand, we got this, the, we got that, right. Uh, the two hand sales rep, no, this CapEx. Thing's interesting. And if you're Amazon and Azure and, and GCP, what are they thinking right now? Cause remember what, four years ago outpost was launched, which essentially hardware. Yeah. This is cloud operating model. Yep. Yeah. They're essentially bringing outpost. This is what they got basically is Amazon and Azure, like, is this ABL on the radar for them? How would you, what, what are they thinking in your mind if we're on, if we're in their office, in their brain trust, are they laughing? Are they like saying, oh, they're scared. Is this real threat >>Opportunity? I, I, I mean, I wouldn't say they're laughing at all. I, I would say they're probably discounting a little bit and saying, okay, fine. You know, that's a strategy that a traditional hardware company is moving to. But I think if you look underneath the covers, you know, two years ago it was, you know, pretty basic stuff they were offering. But now when you start getting into some, you know, HPC is a service, you start getting into data fabric, you start getting into some of the more, um, sophisticated services that they're offering. And, and I think what's interesting about HP. What my, my take is that they're not gonna go after the 250 services the Amazon's offering, they're gonna basically have a portfolio of services that really focus on the core use cases of their infrastructure set. And, and I think one of the danger things, one, one of the, one of the red flags would be, if they start going way up the stack and wanting to offer the entire application stack, that would be like a big flashing warning sign, cuz it's not their sweet spot. It's not, not what they have. >>So machine learning, machine learning and quantum, okay. One you can argue might be up the stack machine learning quantum should be in their wheelhouse. >>I would argue machine learning is not up the stack because what they would focus on is inference. They'd focus on learning. If they came out and said, machine learning all the way up to the, you know, what a, what, what a drug discovery company needs to do. >>So they're bringing it down. >>Yeah. Yeah. Well, no, I think they're focusing on that middle layer, right? That, that, that data layer. And I think that helping companies manage their data make more sense outta their data structure, their data that's core to what they wanna do. >>I, I feel as though what they're doing now is table stakes. Honestly, I do. I do feel like, okay, Hey finally, you know, I say the same thing about apex, you >>Know, we finally got, >>It's like, okay guys, the >>Party. Great. Welcome to the, >>But the one thing I would just say about, about AWS and the other big clouds is whether they might be a little dismissive of what's truly gonna happen at the edge. I think the traditional OEMs that are transforming are really betting on that edge, being a huge play and a huge differentiator for them where the public cloud obviously have their own bets there. But I think they were pretty dismissive initially about how big that went. >>I don't, and I don't think anybody's really figured out the edge yet. >>Well, that's an, it's a battleground. That's what he's saying. I think you're >>Saying, but on the ecosystem, I wanna say up the stack, I think it's the ecosystem. That's gotta fill that out. You gotta see more governance tools and catalogs and AI tools and, and >>It immediately goes more, it goes more vertical when you go edge, you're gonna have different conversations and >>They're >>Lacking. Yeah. And they, but they're in there though. They're in the verticals. HP's in the, yeah, >>For sure. But they gotta build out an ego. Like you walk around here, the data, the number of data companies here. I mean, Starburst is here. I'm actually impressed that Starburst is here. Cause I think they're a forward thinking company. I wanna see that times a hundred. Right. I mean, that's >>You see HP's in all the verticals. That's I think the point here, >>So they should be able to attract that ecosystem and build that, that flywheel that's the, that's the hallmark of a cloud that marketplace. >>Yeah, it is. But I think there's a, again, I go back to, they really gotta stay focused on that infrastructure and data management. Yeah. >>But they'll be focused on that, but, but their ecosystem, >>Their ecosystem will then take it up from there. And I think that's the next stage >>And that ecosystem's gotta include OT players and communications technologies players as well. Right. Because that stuff gets kind of sucked up in that, in that edge play. Do >>You feel like HPE has a, has a leg up on that or like a little, a little bit of a lead or is it pretty much, you know, even raced right now? >>I think they've, I think the big infrastructure companies have all had OEM businesses and they've all played there. It's it's, it's also helping those OT players actually convert their own needs into more of a software play and, and not so much of >>Physical. You've been, you've been following and you guys both have been following HP and HPE for years. They've been on the edge for a long time. I've been focused on this edge. Yeah. Now they might not have the product traction that's right. Or they might not develop as fast, but industrial OT and IOT they've been talking about it, focused on it. I think Amazon was mostly like, okay, we gotta get to the edge and like the enterprise. And, and I think HP's got a leg up in my opinion on that. Well, I question is can they execute? >>Yeah. I mean, PTC was here years ago on stage talking >>About, but I mean, you think about, if you think about the edge, right. I mean, I would argue one of the best acquisitions this company ever did was Aruba. Right. I mean, it basically changed the whole conversation of the edge changed the whole conversation. >>If >>Became GreenLake, it was GreenLake. >>Well, it became a big department. They gave a big, but, but, but I mean, you know, I mean they, they, they went after going selling edge line servers and frankly it's very difficult to gain traction there. Yeah. Aruba, huge area. And I think the March announcement was when they brought Aruba management into. Yeah. Yeah. >>Totally. >>Last question. Love >>That. >>What are you guys saying about the, the Broadcom VMware acquisition? What's the, what are the implications for the ecosystem for companies like HPE and just generally for the it business? >>Yeah. So >>You start. Yeah, sure. I'll start, I'll start there. So look, you know, we've, you know, spent some time, uh, going through it spent some time, you know, speaking, uh, to the, to the, to the folks involved and, and, and I gotta tell you, I think this is a really interesting moment for Broadcom. This is Broadcom's opportunity to basically build a different kind of a conversation with developers to, uh, try to invest in. I mean, just for perspective, right? These numbers may not be exact. And I know a dollar is not a dollar, but in 2001, anybody, remember what HP paid for? Compact >>8,000,000,020, >>So 25 billion, 25 billion. Wow. VMware just got sold for 61 billion. Wow. Okay. Unbill dollars. Okay. That gives you a perspective. No, again, I know a dollar is not a dollar 2000. >>It's still big numbers, >>2022. So having said that, if you just did it to, to, to basically build your DCF model and say, okay, over this amount of time, I'll pay you this. And I'll take the money out of this period of time, which is what people have criticized them for. I think that's a little shortsighted. I, yeah, I think this is Broadcom's opportunity to invest in that product and really try to figure out how to get a seat at the table in software and pivot their company to enterprise software in a different way. They have to prove that they're willing to do that. And then frankly, that they can develop the skills to do that over time. But I do believe this is a, a different, this is a pivot point. This is not >>CA this is not CA >>It's not CA >>In my, in my mind, it can't be CA they would, they would destroy too much. Now you and I, Dave had some, had some conversations on Twitter. I, I don't think it's the step up to them sort of thinking differently about semiconductor, dying, doing some custom semi I, I don't think that's. Yeah. I agree with that. Yeah. I think I, I think this is really about, I got two aspiration for them pivoting the company. They could >>Justify the >>Price to the, getting a seat at the adults table in software is, >>Well, if, if Broadcom has been squeezing their supplies, we all hear the scutle butt. Yeah. If they're squeezing, they can use VMware to justify the prices. Yeah. Maybe use that hostage. And that installed base. That's kind of Mike conspiracy. >>I think they've told us what they're gonna do. >><laugh> I do. >>Maybe it's not like C what's your conspiracy theory like Symantec, but what >>Do you think? Well, I mean, there's still, I mean, so VMware there's really nobody that can do all the things that VMware does say. So really impossible for an enterprise to just rip 'em out. But obviously you can, you can sour people's taste and you can very much influence the direction they head in with the collection of, of providers. One thing, interesting thing here is, was the 37% of VMware's revenues sold through Dell. So there's, there's lots of dependencies. It's not, it's not as simple as I think John, you you're right. You can't just pull the CA playbook out and rerun it here. This is a lot more complex. Yeah. It's a lot more volume of, of, of distribution, but a fair amount of VMware's install >>Base Dell's influence is still there basically >>Is in the mid-market. It's not, it's not something that they're gonna touch directly. >>You think about what VMware did. I mean, they kept adding new businesses, buying new businesses. I mean, is security business gonna stay >>Networking security, I think are interesting. >>Same >>Customers >>Over and over. Haven't done anything. VMware has the same customers. What new >>Customers. So imagine simplifying VMware. Right, right. Becomes a different equation. It's really interesting. And to your point, yeah. I mean, I think Broadcom is, I mean, Tom Crouse knows how to run a business. >>Yeah. He knows how to run a business. He's gonna, I, I think it's gonna be, you know, it's gonna be an efficient business. It's gonna be a well run business, but I think it's a pivot point for >>Broadcom. It's amazing to me, Broadcom sells to HPE. They sell it to Dell and they've got a market cap. That's 10 X, you know? Yes. Yeah. All we gotta go guys. Awesome. Great conversation guys. >>A lot. Thanks for having us on. >>Okay. Listen, uh, day two is a, is a wrap. We'll be here tomorrow, all day. Dave ante, John furrier, Lisa Martin, Lisa. Hope you're feeling okay. We'll see you tomorrow. Thanks for watching the cube, your leader in enterprise tech, live coverage.