(upbeat music) >> Hello, everyone, welcome to theCUBE. I'm John Furrier, the host of theCUBE in Palo Alto, California. Also it's SiliconANGLE News. Got two great guests here to talk about AI, the impact of the future of the internet, the applications, the people. Amr Awadallah, the founder and CEO, Ed Alban is the CEO of Vectara, a new startup that emerged out of the original Cloudera, I would say, 'cause Amr's known, famous for the Cloudera founding, which was really the beginning of the big data movement. And now as AI goes mainstream, there's so much to talk about, so much to go on. And plus the new company is one of the, now what I call the wave, this next big wave, I call it the fifth wave in the industry. You know, you had PCs, you had the internet, you had mobile. This generative AI thing is real. And you're starting to see startups come out in droves. Amr obviously was founder of Cloudera, Big Data, and now Vectara. And Ed Albanese, you guys have a new company. Welcome to the show. >> Thank you. It's great to be here. >> So great to see you. Now the story is theCUBE started in the Cloudera office. Thanks to you, and your friendly entrepreneurship views that you have. We got to know each other over the years. But Cloudera had Hadoop, which was the beginning of what I call the big data wave, which then became what we now call data lakes, data oceans, and data infrastructure that's developed from that. It's almost interesting to look back 12 plus years, and see that what AI is doing now, right now, is opening up the eyes to the mainstream, and the application's almost mind blowing. You know, Sati Natel called it the Mosaic Moment, didn't say Netscape, he built Netscape (laughing) but called it the Mosaic Moment. You're seeing companies in startups, kind of the alpha geeks running here, because this is the new frontier, and there's real meat on the bone, in terms of like things to do. Why? Why is this happening now? What's is the confluence of the forces happening, that are making this happen? >> Yeah, I mean if you go back to the Cloudera days, with big data, and so on, that was more about data processing. Like how can we process data, so we can extract numbers from it, and do reporting, and maybe take some actions, like this is a fraud transaction, or this is not. And in the meanwhile, many of the researchers working in the neural network, and deep neural network space, were trying to focus on data understanding, like how can I understand the data, and learn from it, so I can take actual actions, based on the data directly, just like a human does. And we were only good at doing that at the level of somebody who was five years old, or seven years old, all the way until about 2013. And starting in 2013, which is only 10 years ago, a number of key innovations started taking place, and each one added on. It was no major innovation that just took place. It was a couple of really incremental ones, but they added on top of each other, in a very exponentially additive way, that led to, by the end of 2019, we now have models, deep neural network models, that can read and understand human text just like we do. Right? And they can reason about it, and argue with you, and explain it to you. And I think that's what is unlocking this whole new wave of innovation that we're seeing right now. So data understanding would be the essence of it. >> So it's not a Big Bang kind of theory, it's been evolving over time, and I think that the tipping point has been the advancements and other things. I mean look at cloud computing, and look how fast it just crept up on AWS. I mean AWS you back three, five years ago, I was talking to Swami yesterday, and their big news about AI, expanding the Hugging Face's relationship with AWS. And just three, five years ago, there wasn't a model training models out there. But as compute comes out, and you got more horsepower,, these large language models, these foundational models, they're flexible, they're not monolithic silos, they're interacting. There's a whole new, almost fusion of data happening. Do you see that? I mean is that part of this? >> Of course, of course. I mean this wave is building on all the previous waves. We wouldn't be at this point if we did not have hardware that can scale, in a very efficient way. We wouldn't be at this point, if we don't have data that we're collecting about everything we do, that we're able to process in this way. So this, this movement, this motion, this phase we're in, absolutely builds on the shoulders of all the previous phases. For some of the observers from the outside, when they see chatGPT for the first time, for them was like, "Oh my god, this just happened overnight." Like it didn't happen overnight. (laughing) GPT itself, like GPT3, which is what chatGPT is based on, was released a year ahead of chatGPT, and many of us were seeing the power it can provide, and what it can do. I don't know if Ed agrees with that. >> Yeah, Ed? >> I do. Although I would acknowledge that the possibilities now, because of what we've hit from a maturity standpoint, have just opened up in an incredible way, that just wasn't tenable even three years ago. And that's what makes it, it's true that it developed incrementally, in the same way that, you know, the possibilities of a mobile handheld device, you know, in 2006 were there, but when the iPhone came out, the possibilities just exploded. And that's the moment we're in. >> Well, I've had many conversations over the past couple months around this area with chatGPT. John Markoff told me the other day, that he calls it, "The five dollar toy," because it's not that big of a deal, in context to what AI's doing behind the scenes, and all the work that's done on ethics, that's happened over the years, but it has woken up the mainstream, so everyone immediately jumps to ethics. "Does it work? "It's not factual," And everyone who's inside the industry is like, "This is amazing." 'Cause you have two schools of thought there. One's like, people that think this is now the beginning of next gen, this is now we're here, this ain't your grandfather's chatbot, okay?" With NLP, it's got reasoning, it's got other things. >> I'm in that camp for sure. >> Yeah. Well I mean, everyone who knows what's going on is in that camp. And as the naysayers start to get through this, and they go, "Wow, it's not just plagiarizing homework, "it's helping me be better. "Like it could rewrite my memo, "bring the lead to the top." It's so the format of the user interface is interesting, but it's still a data-driven app. >> Absolutely. >> So where does it go from here? 'Cause I'm not even calling this the first ending. This is like pregame, in my opinion. What do you guys see this going, in terms of scratching the surface to what happens next? >> I mean, I'll start with, I just don't see how an application is going to look the same in the next three years. Who's going to want to input data manually, in a form field? Who is going to want, or expect, to have to put in some text in a search box, and then read through 15 different possibilities, and try to figure out which one of them actually most closely resembles the question they asked? You know, I don't see that happening. Who's going to start with an absolute blank sheet of paper, and expect no help? That is not how an application will work in the next three years, and it's going to fundamentally change how people interact and spend time with opening any element on their mobile phone, or on their computer, to get something done. >> Yes. I agree with that. Like every single application, over the next five years, will be rewritten, to fit within this model. So imagine an HR application, I don't want to name companies, but imagine an HR application, and you go into application and you clicking on buttons, because you want to take two weeks of vacation, and menus, and clicking here and there, reasons and managers, versus just telling the system, "I'm taking two weeks of vacation, going to Las Vegas," book it, done. >> Yeah. >> And the system just does it for you. If you weren't completing in your input, in your description, for what you want, then the system asks you back, "Did you mean this? "Did you mean that? "Were you trying to also do this as well?" >> Yeah. >> "What was the reason?" And that will fit it for you, and just do it for you. So I think the user interface that we have with apps, is going to change to be very similar to the user interface that we have with each other. And that's why all these apps will need to evolve. >> I know we don't have a lot of time, 'cause you guys are very busy, but I want to definitely have multiple segments with you guys, on this topic, because there's so much to talk about. There's a lot of parallels going on here. I was talking again with Swami who runs all the AI database at AWS, and I asked him, I go, "This feels a lot like the original AWS. "You don't have to provision a data center." A lot of this heavy lifting on the back end, is these large language models, with these foundational models. So the bottleneck in the past, was the energy, and cost to actually do it. Now you're seeing it being stood up faster. So there's definitely going to be a tsunami of apps. I would see that clearly. What is it? We don't know yet. But also people who are going to leverage the fact that I can get started building value. So I see a startup boom coming, and I see an application tsunami of refactoring things. >> Yes. >> So the replatforming is already kind of happening. >> Yes, >> OpenAI, chatGPT, whatever. So that's going to be a developer environment. I mean if Amazon turns this into an API, or a Microsoft, what you guys are doing. >> We're turning it into API as well. That's part of what we're doing as well, yes. >> This is why this is exciting. Amr, you've lived the big data dream, and and we used to talk, if you didn't have a big data problem, if you weren't full of data, you weren't really getting it. Now people have all the data, and they got to stand this up. >> Yeah. >> So the analogy is again, the mobile, I like the mobile movement, and using mobile as an analogy, most companies were not building for a mobile environment, right? They were just building for the web, and legacy way of doing apps. And as soon as the user expectations shifted, that my expectation now, I need to be able to do my job on this small screen, on the mobile device with a touchscreen. Everybody had to invest in re-architecting, and re-implementing every single app, to fit within that model, and that model of interaction. And we are seeing the exact same thing happen now. And one of the core things we're focused on at Vectara, is how to simplify that for organizations, because a lot of them are overwhelmed by large language models, and ML. >> They don't have the staff. >> Yeah, yeah, yeah. They're understaffed, they don't have the skills. >> But they got developers, they've got DevOps, right? >> Yes. >> So they have the DevSecOps going on. >> Exactly, yes. >> So our goal is to simplify it enough for them that they can start leveraging this technology effectively, within their applications. >> Ed, you're the COO of the company, obviously a startup. You guys are growing. You got great backup, and good team. You've also done a lot of business development, and technical business development in this area. If you look at the landscape right now, and I agree the apps are coming, every company I talk to, that has that jet chatGPT of, you know, epiphany, "Oh my God, look how cool this is. "Like magic." Like okay, it's code, settle down. >> Mm hmm. >> But everyone I talk to is using it in a very horizontal way. I talk to a very senior person, very tech alpha geek, very senior person in the industry, technically. they're using it for log data, they're using it for configuration of routers. And in other areas, they're using it for, every vertical has a use case. So this is horizontally scalable from a use case standpoint. When you hear horizontally scalable, first thing I chose in my mind is cloud, right? >> Mm hmm. >> So cloud, and scalability that way. And the data is very specialized. So now you have this vertical specialization, horizontally scalable, everyone will be refactoring. What do you see, and what are you seeing from customers, that you talk to, and prospects? >> Yeah, I mean put yourself in the shoes of an application developer, who is actually trying to make their application a bit more like magic. And to have that soon-to-be, honestly, expected experience. They've got to think about things like performance, and how efficiently that they can actually execute a query, or a question. They've got to think about cost. Generative isn't cheap, like the inference of it. And so you've got to be thoughtful about how and when you take advantage of it, you can't use it as a, you know, everything looks like a nail, and I've got a hammer, and I'm going to hit everything with it, because that will be wasteful. Developers also need to think about how they're going to take advantage of, but not lose their own data. So there has to be some controls around what they feed into the large language model, if anything. Like, should they fine tune a large language model with their own data? Can they keep it logically separated, but still take advantage of the powers of a large language model? And they've also got to take advantage, and be aware of the fact that when data is generated, that it is a different class of data. It might not fully be their own. >> Yeah. >> And it may not even be fully verified. And so when the logical cycle starts, of someone making a request, the relationship between that request, and the output, those things have to be stored safely, logically, and identified as such. >> Yeah. >> And taken advantage of in an ongoing fashion. So these are mega problems, each one of them independently, that, you know, you can think of it as middleware companies need to take advantage of, and think about, to help the next wave of application development be logical, sensible, and effective. It's not just calling some raw API on the cloud, like openAI, and then just, you know, you get your answer and you're done, because that is a very brute force approach. >> Well also I will point, first of all, I agree with your statement about the apps experience, that's going to be expected, form filling. Great point. The interesting about chatGPT. >> Sorry, it's not just form filling, it's any action you would like to take. >> Yeah. >> Instead of clicking, and dragging, and dropping, and doing it on a menu, or on a touch screen, you just say it, and it's and it happens perfectly. >> Yeah. It's a different interface. And that's why I love that UIUX experiences, that's the people falling out of their chair moment with chatGPT, right? But a lot of the things with chatGPT, if you feed it right, it works great. If you feed it wrong and it goes off the rails, it goes off the rails big. >> Yes, yes. >> So the the Bing catastrophes. >> Yeah. >> And that's an example of garbage in, garbage out, classic old school kind of comp-side phrase that we all use. >> Yep. >> Yes. >> This is about data in injection, right? It reminds me the old SQL days, if you had to, if you can sling some SQL, you were a magician, you know, to get the right answer, it's pretty much there. So you got to feed the AI. >> You do, Some people call this, the early word to describe this as prompt engineering. You know, old school, you know, search, or, you know, engagement with data would be, I'm going to, I have a question or I have a query. New school is, I have, I have to issue it a prompt, because I'm trying to get, you know, an action or a reaction, from the system. And the active engineering, there are a lot of different ways you could do it, all the way from, you know, raw, just I'm going to send you whatever I'm thinking. >> Yeah. >> And you get the unintended outcomes, to more constrained, where I'm going to just use my own data, and I'm going to constrain the initial inputs, the data I already know that's first party, and I trust, to, you know, hyper constrain, where the application is actually, it's looking for certain elements to respond to. >> It's interesting Amr, this is why I love this, because one we are in the media, we're recording this video now, we'll stream it. But we got all your linguistics, we're talking. >> Yes. >> This is data. >> Yep. >> So the data quality becomes now the new intellectual property, because, if you have that prompt source data, it makes data or content, in our case, the original content, intellectual property. >> Absolutely. >> Because that's the value. And that's where you see chatGPT fall down, is because they're trying to scroll the web, and people think it's search. It's not necessarily search, it's giving you something that you wanted. It is a lot of that, I remember in Cloudera, you said, "Ask the right questions." Remember that phrase you guys had, that slogan? >> Mm hmm. And that's prompt engineering. So that's exactly, that's the reinvention of "Ask the right question," is prompt engineering is, if you don't give these models the question in the right way, and very few people know how to frame it in the right way with the right context, then you will get garbage out. Right? That is the garbage in, garbage out. But if you specify the question correctly, and you provide with it the metadata that constrain what that question is going to be acted upon or answered upon, then you'll get much better answers. And that's exactly what we solved Vectara. >> Okay. So before we get into the last couple minutes we have left, I want to make sure we get a plug in for the opportunity, and the profile of Vectara, your new company. Can you guys both share with me what you think the current situation is? So for the folks who are now having those moments of, "Ah, AI's bullshit," or, "It's not real, it's a lot of stuff," from, "Oh my god, this is magic," to, "Okay, this is the future." >> Yes. >> What would you say to that person, if you're at a cocktail party, or in the elevator say, "Calm down, this is the first inning." How do you explain the dynamics going on right now, to someone who's either in the industry, but not in the ropes? How would you explain like, what this wave's about? How would you describe it, and how would you prepare them for how to change their life around this? >> Yeah, so I'll go first and then I'll let Ed go. Efficiency, efficiency is the description. So we figured that a way to be a lot more efficient, a way where you can write a lot more emails, create way more content, create way more presentations. Developers can develop 10 times faster than they normally would. And that is very similar to what happened during the Industrial Revolution. I always like to look at examples from the past, to read what will happen now, and what will happen in the future. So during the Industrial Revolution, it was about efficiency with our hands, right? So I had to make a piece of cloth, like this piece of cloth for this shirt I'm wearing. Our ancestors, they had to spend month taking the cotton, making it into threads, taking the threads, making them into pieces of cloth, and then cutting it. And now a machine makes it just like that, right? And the ancestors now turned from the people that do the thing, to manage the machines that do the thing. And I think the same thing is going to happen now, is our efficiency will be multiplied extremely, as human beings, and we'll be able to do a lot more. And many of us will be able to do things they couldn't do before. So another great example I always like to use is the example of Google Maps, and GPS. Very few of us knew how to drive a car from one location to another, and read a map, and get there correctly. But once that efficiency of an AI, by the way, behind these things is very, very complex AI, that figures out how to do that for us. All of us now became amazing navigators that can go from any point to any point. So that's kind of how I look at the future. >> And that's a great real example of impact. Ed, your take on how you would talk to a friend, or colleague, or anyone who asks like, "How do I make sense of the current situation? "Is it real? "What's in it for me, and what do I do?" I mean every company's rethinking their business right now, around this. What would you say to them? >> You know, I usually like to show, rather than describe. And so, you know, the other day I just got access, I've been using an application for a long time, called Notion, and it's super popular. There's like 30 or 40 million users. And the new version of Notion came out, which has AI embedded within it. And it's AI that allows you primarily to create. So if you could break down the world of AI into find and create, for a minute, just kind of logically separate those two things, find is certainly going to be massively impacted in our experiences as consumers on, you know, Google and Bing, and I can't believe I just said the word Bing in the same sentence as Google, but that's what's happening now (all laughing), because it's a good example of change. >> Yes. >> But also inside the business. But on the crate side, you know, Notion is a wiki product, where you try to, you know, note down things that you are thinking about, or you want to share and memorialize. But sometimes you do need help to get it down fast. And just in the first day of using this new product, like my experience has really fundamentally changed. And I think that anybody who would, you know, anybody say for example, that is using an existing app, I would show them, open up the app. Now imagine the possibility of getting a starting point right off the bat, in five seconds of, instead of having to whole cloth draft this thing, imagine getting a starting point then you can modify and edit, or just dispose of and retry again. And that's the potential for me. I can't imagine a scenario where, in a few years from now, I'm going to be satisfied if I don't have a little bit of help, in the same way that I don't manually spell check every email that I send. I automatically spell check it. I love when I'm getting type ahead support inside of Google, or anything. Doesn't mean I always take it, or when texting. >> That's efficiency too. I mean the cloud was about developers getting stuff up quick. >> Exactly. >> All that heavy lifting is there for you, so you don't have to do it. >> Right? >> And you get to the value faster. >> Exactly. I mean, if history taught us one thing, it's, you have to always embrace efficiency, and if you don't fast enough, you will fall behind. Again, looking at the industrial revolution, the companies that embraced the industrial revolution, they became the leaders in the world, and the ones who did not, they all like. >> Well the AI thing that we got to watch out for, is watching how it goes off the rails. If it doesn't have the right prompt engineering, or data architecture, infrastructure. >> Yes. >> It's a big part. So this comes back down to your startup, real quick, I know we got a couple minutes left. Talk about the company, the motivation, and we'll do a deeper dive on on the company. But what's the motivation? What are you targeting for the market, business model? The tech, let's go. >> Actually, I would like Ed to go first. Go ahead. >> Sure, I mean, we're a developer-first, API-first platform. So the product is oriented around allowing developers who may not be superstars, in being able to either leverage, or choose, or select their own large language models for appropriate use cases. But they that want to be able to instantly add the power of large language models into their application set. We started with search, because we think it's going to be one of the first places that people try to take advantage of large language models, to help find information within an application context. And we've built our own large language models, focused on making it very efficient, and elegant, to find information more quickly. So what a developer can do is, within minutes, go up, register for an account, and get access to a set of APIs, that allow them to send data, to be converted into a format that's easy to understand for large language models, vectors. And then secondarily, they can issue queries, ask questions. And they can ask them very, the questions that can be asked, are very natural language questions. So we're talking about long form sentences, you know, drill down types of questions, and they can get answers that either come back in depending upon the form factor of the user interface, in list form, or summarized form, where summarized equals the opportunity to kind of see a condensed, singular answer. >> All right. I have a. >> Oh okay, go ahead, you go. >> I was just going to say, I'm going to be a customer for you, because I want, my dream was to have a hologram of theCUBE host, me and Dave, and have questions be generated in the metaverse. So you know. (all laughing) >> There'll be no longer any guests here. They'll all be talking to you guys. >> Give a couple bullets, I'll spit out 10 good questions. Publish a story. This brings the automation, I'm sorry to interrupt you. >> No, no. No, no, I was just going to follow on on the same. So another way to look at exactly what Ed described is, we want to offer you chatGPT for your own data, right? So imagine taking all of the recordings of all of the interviews you have done, and having all of the content of that being ingested by a system, where you can now have a conversation with your own data and say, "Oh, last time when I met Amr, "which video games did we talk about? "Which movie or book did we use as an analogy "for how we should be embracing data science, "and big data, which is moneyball," I know you use moneyball all the time. And you start having that conversation. So, now the data doesn't become a passive asset that you just have in your organization. No. It's an active participant that's sitting with you, on the table, helping you make decisions. >> One of my favorite things to do with customers, is to go to their site or application, and show them me using it. So for example, one of the customers I talked to was one of the biggest property management companies in the world, that lets people go and rent homes, and houses, and things like that. And you know, I went and I showed them me searching through reviews, looking for information, and trying different words, and trying to find out like, you know, is this place quiet? Is it comfortable? And then I put all the same data into our platform, and I showed them the world of difference you can have when you start asking that question wholeheartedly, and getting real information that doesn't have anything to do with the words you asked, but is really focused on the meaning. You know, when I asked like, "Is it quiet?" You know, answers would come back like, "The wind whispered through the trees peacefully," and you know, it's like nothing to do with quiet in the literal word sense, but in the meaning sense, everything to do with it. And that that was magical even for them, to see that. >> Well you guys are the front end of this big wave. Congratulations on the startup, Amr. I know you guys got great pedigree in big data, and you've got a great team, and congratulations. Vectara is the name of the company, check 'em out. Again, the startup boom is coming. This will be one of the major waves, generative AI is here. I think we'll look back, and it will be pointed out as a major inflection point in the industry. >> Absolutely. >> There's not a lot of hype behind that. People are are seeing it, experts are. So it's going to be fun, thanks for watching. >> Thanks John. (soft music)

(inspirational music) (music ends) >> Okay, so now that we've heard Scott talk about smart data fabrics, it's time to see this in action. Right now we're joined by Jess Jowdy, who's the manager of Healthcare Field Engineering at InterSystems. She's going to give a demo of how smart data fabrics actually work, and she's going to show how embedding a wide range of analytics capabilities, including data exploration business intelligence, natural language processing and machine learning directly within the fabric makes it faster and easier for organizations to gain new insights and power intelligence predictive and prescriptive services and applications. Now, according to InterSystems, smart data fabrics are applicable across many industries from financial services to supply chain to healthcare and more. Jess today is going to be speaking through the lens of a healthcare focused demo. Don't worry, Joe Lichtenberg will get into some of the other use cases that you're probably interested in hearing about. That will be in our third segment, but for now let's turn it over to Jess. Jess, good to see you. >> Hi, yeah, thank you so much for having me. And so for this demo, we're really going to be bucketing these features of a smart data fabric into four different segments. We're going to be dealing with connections, collections, refinements, and analysis. And so we'll see that throughout the demo as we go. So without further ado, let's just go ahead and jump into this demo, and you'll see my screen pop up here. I actually like to start at the end of the demo. So I like to begin by illustrating what an end user's going to see, and don't mind the screen 'cause I gave you a little sneak peek of what's about to happen. But essentially what I'm going to be doing is using Postman to simulate a call from an external application. So we talked about being in the healthcare industry. This could be, for instance, a mobile application that a patient is using to view an aggregated summary of information across that patient's continuity of care or some other kind of application. So we might be pulling information in this case from an electronic medical record. We might be grabbing clinical history from that. We might be grabbing clinical notes from a medical transcription software, or adverse reaction warnings from a clinical risk grouping application, and so much more. So I'm really going to be simulating a patient logging in on their phone and retrieving this information through this Postman call. So what I'm going to do is I'm just going to hit send, I've already preloaded everything here, and I'm going to be looking for information where the last name of this patient is Simmons, and their medical record number or their patient identifier in the system is 32345. And so as you can see, I have this single JSON payload that showed up here of, just, relevant clinical information for my patient whose last name is Simmons, all within a single response. So fantastic, right? Typically though, when we see responses that look like this there is an assumption that this service is interacting with a single backend system, and that single backend system is in charge of packaging that information up and returning it back to this caller. But in a smart data fabric architecture, we're able to expand the scope to handle information across different, in this case, clinical applications. So how did this actually happen? Let's peel back another layer and really take a look at what happened in the background. What you're looking at here is our mission control center for our smart data fabric. On the left we have our APIs that allow users to interact with particular services. On the right we have our connections to our different data silos. And in the middle here, we have our data fabric coordinator which is going to be in charge of this refinement and analysis, those key pieces of our smart data fabric. So let's look back and think about the example we just showed. I received an inbound request for information for a patient whose last name is Simmons. My end user is requesting to connect to that service, and that's happening here at my patient data retrieval API location. Users can define any number of different services and APIs depending on their use cases. And to that end, we do also support full life cycle API management within this platform. When you're dealing with APIs, I always like to make a little shout out on this, that you really want to make sure you have enough, like a granular enough security model to handle and limit which APIs and which services a consumer can interact with. In this IRIS platform, which we're talking about today we have a very granular role-based security model that allows you to handle that, but it's really important in a smart data fabric to consider who's accessing your data and in what context. >> Can I just interrupt you for a second, Jess? >> Yeah, please. >> So you were showing on the left hand side of the demo a couple of APIs. I presume that can be a very long list. I mean, what do you see as typical? >> I mean you could have hundreds of these APIs depending on what services an organization is serving up for their consumers. So yeah, we've seen hundreds of these services listed here. >> So my question is, obviously security is critical in the healthcare industry, and API securities are like, really hot topic these days. How do you deal with that? >> Yeah, and I think API security is interesting 'cause it can happen at so many layers. So, there's interactions with the API itself. So can I even see this API and leverage it? And then within an API call, you then have to deal with all right, which end points or what kind of interactions within that API am I allowed to do? What data am I getting back? And with healthcare data, the whole idea of consent to see certain pieces of data is critical. So, the way that we handle that is, like I said, same thing at different layers. There is access to a particular API, which can happen within the IRIS product, and also we see it happening with an API management layer, which has become a really hot topic with a lot of organizations. And then when it comes to data security, that really happens under the hood within your smart data fabric. So, that role-based access control becomes very important in assigning, you know, roles and permissions to certain pieces of information. Getting that granular becomes the cornerstone of the security. >> And that's been designed in, it's not a bolt on as they like to say. >> Absolutely. >> Okay, can we get into collect now? >> Of course, we're going to move on to the collection piece at this point in time, which involves pulling information from each of my different data silos to create an overall aggregated record. So commonly, each data source requires a different method for establishing connections and collecting this information. So for instance, interactions with an EMR may require leveraging a standard healthcare messaging format like Fire. Interactions with a homegrown enterprise data warehouse for instance, may use SQL. For a cloud-based solutions managed by a vendor, they may only allow you to use web service calls to pull data. So it's really important that your data fabric platform that you're using has the flexibility to connect to all of these different systems and applications. And I'm about to log out, so I'm going to (chuckles) keep my session going here. So therefore it's incredibly important that your data fabric has the flexibility to connect to all these different kinds of applications and data sources, and all these different kinds of formats and over all of these different kinds of protocols. So let's think back on our example here. I had four different applications that I was requesting information for to create that payload that we saw initially. Those are listed here under this operations section. So these are going out and connecting to downstream systems to pull information into my smart data fabric. What's great about the IRIS platform is, it has an embedded interoperability platform. So there's all of these native adapters that can support these common connections that we see for different kinds of applications. So using REST, or SOAP, or SQL, or FTP, regardless of that protocol, there's an adapter to help you work with that. And we also think of the types of formats that we typically see data coming in as in healthcare we have HL7, we have Fire, we have CCDs, across the industry, JSON is, you know, really hitting a market strong now, and XML payloads, flat files. We need to be able to handle all of these different kinds of formats over these different kinds of protocols. So to illustrate that, if I click through these when I select a particular connection on the right side panel, I'm going to see the different settings that are associated with that particular connection that allows me to collect information back into my smart data fabric. In this scenario, my connection to my chart script application in this example, communicates over a SOAP connection. When I'm grabbing information from my clinical risk grouping application I'm using a SQL based connection. When I'm connecting to my EMR, I'm leveraging a standard healthcare messaging format known as Fire, which is a REST based protocol. And then when I'm working with my health record management system, I'm leveraging a standard HTTP adapter. So you can see how we can be flexible when dealing with these different kinds of applications and systems. And then it becomes important to be able to validate that you've established those connections correctly, and be able to do it in a reliable and quick way. Because if you think about it, you could have hundreds of these different kinds of applications built out and you want to make sure that you're maintaining and understanding those connections. So I can actually go ahead and test one of these applications and put in, for instance my patient's last name and their MRN, and make sure that I'm actually getting data back from that system. So it's a nice little sanity check as we're building out that data fabric to ensure that we're able to establish these connections appropriately. So turnkey adapters are fantastic, as you can see we're leveraging them all here, but sometimes these connections are going to require going one step further and building something really specific for an application. So why don't we go one step further here and talk about doing something custom or doing something innovative. And so it's important for users to have the ability to develop and go beyond what's an out-of-the box or black box approach to be able to develop things that are specific to their data fabric, or specific to their particular connection. In this scenario, the IRIS data platform gives users access to the entire underlying code base. So you not only get an opportunity to view how we're establishing these connections or how we're building out these processes, but you have the opportunity to inject your own kind of processing, your own kinds of pipelines into this. So as an example, you can leverage any number of different programming languages right within this pipeline. And so I went ahead and I injected Python. So Python is a very up and coming language, right? We see more and more developers turning towards Python to do their development. So it's important that your data fabric supports those kinds of developers and users that have standardized on these kinds of programming languages. This particular script here, as you can see actually calls out to our turnkey adapters. So we see a combination of out-of-the-box code that is provided in this data fabric platform from IRIS, combined with organization specific or user specific customizations that are included in this Python method. So it's a nice little combination of how do we bring the developer experience in and mix it with out-of-the-box capabilities that we can provide in a smart data fabric. >> Wow. >> Yeah, I'll pause. (laughs) >> It's a lot here. You know, actually- >> I can pause. >> If I could, if we just want to sort of play that back. So we went to the connect and the collect phase. >> Yes, we're going into refine. So it's a good place to stop. >> So before we get there, so we heard a lot about fine grain security, which is crucial. We heard a lot about different data types, multiple formats. You've got, you know, the ability to bring in different dev tools. We heard about Fire, which of course big in healthcare. And that's the standard, and then SQL for traditional kind of structured data, and then web services like HTTP you mentioned. And so you have a rich collection of capabilities within this single platform. >> Absolutely. And I think that's really important when you're dealing with a smart data fabric because what you're effectively doing is you're consolidating all of your processing, all of your collection, into a single platform. So that platform needs to be able to handle any number of different kinds of scenarios and technical challenges. So you've got to pack that platform with as many of these features as you can to consolidate that processing. >> All right, so now we're going into refinement. >> We're going into refinement. Exciting. (chuckles) So how do we actually do refinement? Where does refinement happen? And how does this whole thing end up being performant? Well the key to all of that is this SDF coordinator, or stands for Smart Data Fabric coordinator. And what this particular process is doing is essentially orchestrating all of these calls to all of these different downstream systems. It's aggregating, it's collecting that information, it's aggregating it, and it's refining it into that single payload that we saw get returned to the user. So really this coordinator is the main event when it comes to our data fabric. And in the IRIS platform we actually allow users to build these coordinators using web-based tool sets to make it intuitive. So we can take a sneak peek at what that looks like. And as you can see, it follows a flow chart like structure. So there's a start, there is an end, and then there are these different arrows that point to different activities throughout the business process. And so there's all these different actions that are being taken within our coordinator. You can see an action for each of the calls to each of our different data sources to go retrieve information. And then we also have the sync call at the end that is in charge of essentially making sure that all of those responses come back before we package them together and send them out. So this becomes really crucial when we're creating that data fabric. And you know, this is a very simple data fabric example where we're just grabbing data and we're consolidating it together. But you can have really complex orchestrators and coordinators that do any number of different things. So for instance, I could inject SQL logic into this or SQL code, I can have conditional logic, I can do looping, I can do error trapping and handling. So we're talking about a whole number of different features that can be included in this coordinator. So like I said, we have a really very simple process here that's just calling out, grabbing all those different data elements from all those different data sources and consolidating it. We'll look back at this coordinator in a second when we introduce, or we make this data fabric a bit smarter, and we start introducing that analytics piece to it. So this is in charge of the refinement. And so at this point in time we've looked at connections, collections, and refinements. And just to summarize what we've seen 'cause I always like to go back and take a look at everything that we've seen. We have our initial API connection, we have our connections to our individual data sources and we have our coordinators there in the middle that are in charge of collecting the data and refining it into a single payload. As you can imagine, there's a lot going on behind the scenes of a smart data fabric, right? There's all these different processes that are interacting. So it's really important that your smart data fabric platform has really good traceability, really good logging, 'cause you need to be able to know, you know, if there was an issue, where did that issue happen in which connected process, and how did it affect the other processes that are related to it? In IRIS, we have this concept called a visual trace. And what our clients use this for is basically to be able to step through the entire history of a request from when it initially came into the smart data fabric, to when data was sent back out from that smart data fabric. So I didn't record the time, but I bet if you recorded the time it was this time that we sent that request in and you can see my patient's name and their medical record number here, and you can see that that instigated four different calls to four different systems, and they're represented by these arrows going out. So we sent something to chart script, to our health record management system, to our clinical risk grouping application, into my EMR through their Fire server. So every request, every outbound application gets a request and we pull back all of those individual pieces of information from all of those different systems, and we bundle them together. And from my Fire lovers, here's our Fire bundle that we got back from our Fire server. So this is a really good way of being able to validate that I am appropriately grabbing the data from all these different applications and then ultimately consolidating it into one payload. Now we change this into a JSON format before we deliver it, but this is those data elements brought together. And this screen would also be used for being able to see things like error trapping, or errors that were thrown, alerts, warnings, developers might put log statements in just to validate that certain pieces of code are executing. So this really becomes the one stop shop for understanding what's happening behind the scenes with your data fabric. >> Sure, who did what when where, what did the machine do what went wrong, and where did that go wrong? Right at your fingertips. >> Right. And I'm a visual person so a bunch of log files to me is not the most helpful. While being able to see this happened at this time in this location, gives me that understanding I need to actually troubleshoot a problem. >> This business orchestration piece, can you say a little bit more about that? How people are using it? What's the business impact of the business orchestration? >> The business orchestration, especially in the smart data fabric, is really that crucial part of being able to create a smart data fabric. So think of your business orchestrator as doing the heavy lifting of any kind of processing that involves data, right? It's bringing data in, it's analyzing that information it's transforming that data, in a format that your consumer's not going to understand. It's doing any additional injection of custom logic. So really your coordinator or that orchestrator that sits in the middle is the brains behind your smart data fabric. >> And this is available today? It all works? >> It's all available today. Yeah, it all works. And we have a number of clients that are using this technology to support these kinds of use cases. >> Awesome demo. Anything else you want to show us? >> Well, we can keep going. I have a lot to say, but really this is our data fabric. The core competency of IRIS is making it smart, right? So I won't spend too much time on this, but essentially if we go back to our coordinator here, we can see here's that original, that pipeline that we saw where we're pulling data from all these different systems and we're collecting it and we're sending it out. But then we see two more at the end here, which involves getting a readmission prediction and then returning a prediction. So we can not only deliver data back as part of a smart data fabric, but we can also deliver insights back to users and consumers based on data that we've aggregated as part of a smart data fabric. So in this scenario, we're actually taking all that data that we just looked at, and we're running it through a machine learning model that exists within the smart data fabric pipeline, and producing a readmission score to determine if this particular patient is at risk for readmission within the next 30 days. Which is a typical problem that we see in the healthcare space. So what's really exciting about what we're doing in the IRIS world, is we're bringing analytics close to the data with integrated ML. So in this scenario we're actually creating the model, training the model, and then executing the model directly within the IRIS platform. So there's no shuffling of data, there's no external connections to make this happen. And it doesn't really require having a PhD in data science to understand how to do that. It leverages all really basic SQL-like syntax to be able to construct and execute these predictions. So, it's going one step further than the traditional data fabric example to introduce this ability to define actionable insights to our users based on the data that we've brought together. >> Well that readmission probability is huge, right? Because it directly affects the cost for the provider and the patient, you know. So if you can anticipate the probability of readmission and either do things at that moment, or, you know, as an outpatient perhaps, to minimize the probability then that's huge. That drops right to the bottom line. >> Absolutely. And that really brings us from that data fabric to that smart data fabric at the end of the day, which is what makes this so exciting. >> Awesome demo. >> Thank you! >> Jess, are you cool if people want to get in touch with you? Can they do that? >> Oh yes, absolutely. So you can find me on LinkedIn, Jessica Jowdy, and we'd love to hear from you. I always love talking about this topic so we'd be happy to engage on that. >> Great stuff. Thank you Jessica, appreciate it. >> Thank you so much. >> Okay, don't go away because in the next segment, we're going to dig into the use cases where data fabric is driving business value. Stay right there. (inspirational music) (music fades)

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

>> Welcome back to SuperCloud2. This is Dave Vellante, and we're here with Jack Greenfield. He's the Vice President of Enterprise Architecture and the Chief Architect for the global technology platform at Walmart. Jack, I want to thank you for coming on the program. Really appreciate your time. >> Glad to be here, Dave. Thanks for inviting me and appreciate the opportunity to chat with you. >> Yeah, it's our pleasure. Now we call what you've built a SuperCloud. That's our term, not yours, but how would you describe the Walmart Cloud Native Platform? >> So WCNP, as the acronym goes, is essentially an implementation of Kubernetes for the Walmart ecosystem. And what that means is that we've taken Kubernetes off the shelf as open source, and we have integrated it with a number of foundational services that provide other aspects of our computational environment. So Kubernetes off the shelf doesn't do everything. It does a lot. In particular the orchestration of containers, but it delegates through API a lot of key functions. So for example, secret management, traffic management, there's a need for telemetry and observability at a scale beyond what you get from raw Kubernetes. That is to say, harvesting the metrics that are coming out of Kubernetes and processing them, storing them in time series databases, dashboarding them, and so on. There's also an angle to Kubernetes that gets a lot of attention in the daily DevOps routine, that's not really part of the open source deliverable itself, and that is the DevOps sort of CICD pipeline-oriented lifecycle. And that is something else that we've added and integrated nicely. And then one more piece of this picture is that within a Kubernetes cluster, there's a function that is critical to allowing services to discover each other and integrate with each other securely and with proper configuration provided by the concept of a service mesh. So Istio, Linkerd, these are examples of service mesh technologies. And we have gone ahead and integrated actually those two. There's more than those two, but we've integrated those two with Kubernetes. So the net effect is that when a developer within Walmart is going to build an application, they don't have to think about all those other capabilities where they come from or how they're provided. Those are already present, and the way the CICD pipelines are set up, it's already sort of in the picture, and there are configuration points that they can take advantage of in the primary YAML and a couple of other pieces of config that we supply where they can tune it. But at the end of the day, it offloads an awful lot of work for them, having to stand up and operate those services, fail them over properly, and make them robust. All of that's provided for. >> Yeah, you know, developers often complain they spend too much time wrangling and doing things that aren't productive. So I wonder if you could talk about the high level business goals of the initiative in terms of the hardcore benefits. Was the real impetus to tap into best of breed cloud services? Were you trying to cut costs? Maybe gain negotiating leverage with the cloud guys? Resiliency, you know, I know was a major theme. Maybe you could give us a sense of kind of the anatomy of the decision making process that went in. >> Sure, and in the course of answering your question, I think I'm going to introduce the concept of our triplet architecture which we haven't yet touched on in the interview here. First off, just to sort of wrap up the motivation for WCNP itself which is kind of orthogonal to the triplet architecture. It can exist with or without it. Currently does exist with it, which is key, and I'll get to that in a moment. The key drivers, business drivers for WCNP were developer productivity by offloading the kinds of concerns that we've just discussed. Number two, improving resiliency, that is to say reducing opportunity for human error. One of the challenges you tend to run into in a large enterprise is what we call snowflakes, lots of gratuitously different workloads, projects, configurations to the extent that by developing and using WCNP and continuing to evolve it as we have, we end up with cookie cutter like consistency across our workloads which is super valuable when it comes to building tools or building services to automate operations that would otherwise be manual. When everything is pretty much done the same way, that becomes much simpler. Another key motivation for WCNP was the ability to abstract from the underlying cloud provider. And this is going to lead to a discussion of our triplet architecture. At the end of the day, when one works directly with an underlying cloud provider, one ends up taking a lot of dependencies on that particular cloud provider. Those dependencies can be valuable. For example, there are best of breed services like say Cloud Spanner offered by Google or say Cosmos DB offered by Microsoft that one wants to use and one is willing to take the dependency on the cloud provider to get that functionality because it's unique and valuable. On the other hand, one doesn't want to take dependencies on a cloud provider that don't add a lot of value. And with Kubernetes, we have the opportunity, and this is a large part of how Kubernetes was designed and why it is the way it is, we have the opportunity to sort of abstract from the underlying cloud provider for stateless workloads on compute. And so what this lets us do is build container-based applications that can run without change on different cloud provider infrastructure. So the same applications can run on WCNP over Azure, WCNP over GCP, or WCNP over the Walmart private cloud. And we have a private cloud. Our private cloud is OpenStack based and it gives us some significant cost advantages as well as control advantages. So to your point, in terms of business motivation, there's a key cost driver here, which is that we can use our own private cloud when it's advantageous and then use the public cloud provider capabilities when we need to. A key place with this comes into play is with elasticity. So while the private cloud is much more cost effective for us to run and use, it isn't as elastic as what the cloud providers offer, right? We don't have essentially unlimited scale. We have large scale, but the public cloud providers are elastic in the extreme which is a very powerful capability. So what we're able to do is burst, and we use this term bursting workloads into the public cloud from the private cloud to take advantage of the elasticity they offer and then fall back into the private cloud when the traffic load diminishes to the point where we don't need that elastic capability, elastic capacity at low cost. And this is a very important paradigm that I think is going to be very commonplace ultimately as the industry evolves. Private cloud is easier to operate and less expensive, and yet the public cloud provider capabilities are difficult to match. >> And the triplet, the tri is your on-prem private cloud and the two public clouds that you mentioned, is that right? >> That is correct. And we actually have an architecture in which we operate all three of those cloud platforms in close proximity with one another in three different major regions in the US. So we have east, west, and central. And in each of those regions, we have all three cloud providers. And the way it's configured, those data centers are within 10 milliseconds of each other, meaning that it's of negligible cost to interact between them. And this allows us to be fairly agnostic to where a particular workload is running. >> Does a human make that decision, Jack or is there some intelligence in the system that determines that? >> That's a really great question, Dave. And it's a great question because we're at the cusp of that transition. So currently humans make that decision. Humans choose to deploy workloads into a particular region and a particular provider within that region. That said, we're actively developing patterns and practices that will allow us to automate the placement of the workloads for a variety of criteria. For example, if in a particular region, a particular provider is heavily overloaded and is unable to provide the level of service that's expected through our SLAs, we could choose to fail workloads over from that cloud provider to a different one within the same region. But that's manual today. We do that, but people do it. Okay, we'd like to get to where that happens automatically. In the same way, we'd like to be able to automate the failovers, both for high availability and sort of the heavier disaster recovery model between, within a region between providers and even within a provider between the availability zones that are there, but also between regions for the sort of heavier disaster recovery or maintenance driven realignment of workload placement. Today, that's all manual. So we have people moving workloads from region A to region B or data center A to data center B. It's clean because of the abstraction. The workloads don't have to know or care, but there are latency considerations that come into play, and the humans have to be cognizant of those. And automating that can help ensure that we get the best performance and the best reliability. >> But you're developing the dataset to actually, I would imagine, be able to make those decisions in an automated fashion over time anyway. Is that a fair assumption? >> It is, and that's what we're actively developing right now. So if you were to look at us today, we have these nice abstractions and APIs in place, but people run that machine, if you will, moving toward a world where that machine is fully automated. >> What exactly are you abstracting? Is it sort of the deployment model or, you know, are you able to abstract, I'm just making this up like Azure functions and GCP functions so that you can sort of run them, you know, with a consistent experience. What exactly are you abstracting and how difficult was it to achieve that objective technically? >> that's a good question. What we're abstracting is the Kubernetes node construct. That is to say a cluster of Kubernetes nodes which are typically VMs, although they can run bare metal in certain contexts, is something that typically to stand up requires knowledge of the underlying cloud provider. So for example, with GCP, you would use GKE to set up a Kubernetes cluster, and in Azure, you'd use AKS. We are actually abstracting that aspect of things so that the developers standing up applications don't have to know what the underlying cluster management provider is. They don't have to know if it's GCP, AKS or our own Walmart private cloud. Now, in terms of functions like Azure functions that you've mentioned there, we haven't done that yet. That's another piece that we have sort of on our radar screen that, we'd like to get to is serverless approach, and the Knative work from Google and the Azure functions, those are things that we see good opportunity to use for a whole variety of use cases. But right now we're not doing much with that. We're strictly container based right now, and we do have some VMs that are running in sort of more of a traditional model. So our stateful workloads are primarily VM based, but for serverless, that's an opportunity for us to take some of these stateless workloads and turn them into cloud functions. >> Well, and that's another cost lever that you can pull down the road that's going to drop right to the bottom line. Do you see a day or maybe you're doing it today, but I'd be surprised, but where you build applications that actually span multiple clouds or is there, in your view, always going to be a direct one-to-one mapping between where an application runs and the specific cloud platform? >> That's a really great question. Well, yes and no. So today, application development teams choose a cloud provider to deploy to and a location to deploy to, and they have to get involved in moving an application like we talked about today. That said, the bursting capability that I mentioned previously is something that is a step in the direction of automatic migration. That is to say we're migrating workload to different locations automatically. Currently, the prototypes we've been developing and that we think are going to eventually make their way into production are leveraging Istio to assess the load incoming on a particular cluster and start shedding that load into a different location. Right now, the configuration of that is still manual, but there's another opportunity for automation there. And I think a key piece of this is that down the road, well, that's a, sort of a small step in the direction of an application being multi provider. We expect to see really an abstraction of the fact that there is a triplet even. So the workloads are moving around according to whatever the control plane decides is necessary based on a whole variety of inputs. And at that point, you will have true multi-cloud applications, applications that are distributed across the different providers and in a way that application developers don't have to think about. >> So Walmart's been a leader, Jack, in using data for competitive advantages for decades. It's kind of been a poster child for that. You've got a mountain of IP in the form of data, tools, applications best practices that until the cloud came out was all On Prem. But I'm really interested in this idea of building a Walmart ecosystem, which obviously you have. Do you see a day or maybe you're even doing it today where you take what we call the Walmart SuperCloud, WCNP in your words, and point or turn that toward an external world or your ecosystem, you know, supporting those partners or customers that could drive new revenue streams, you know directly from the platform? >> Great questions, Dave. So there's really two things to say here. The first is that with respect to data, our data workloads are primarily VM basis. I've mentioned before some VMware, some straight open stack. But the key here is that WCNP and Kubernetes are very powerful for stateless workloads, but for stateful workloads tend to be still climbing a bit of a growth curve in the industry. So our data workloads are not primarily based on WCNP. They're VM based. Now that said, there is opportunity to make some progress there, and we are looking at ways to move things into containers that are currently running in VMs which are stateful. The other question you asked is related to how we expose data to third parties and also functionality. Right now we do have in-house, for our own use, a very robust data architecture, and we have followed the sort of domain-oriented data architecture guidance from Martin Fowler. And we have data lakes in which we collect data from all the transactional systems and which we can then use and do use to build models which are then used in our applications. But right now we're not exposing the data directly to customers as a product. That's an interesting direction that's been talked about and may happen at some point, but right now that's internal. What we are exposing to customers is applications. So we're offering our global integrated fulfillment capabilities, our order picking and curbside pickup capabilities, and our cloud powered checkout capabilities to third parties. And this means we're standing up our own internal applications as externally facing SaaS applications which can serve our partners' customers. >> Yeah, of course, Martin Fowler really first introduced to the world Zhamak Dehghani's data mesh concept and this whole idea of data products and domain oriented thinking. Zhamak Dehghani, by the way, is a speaker at our event as well. Last question I had is edge, and how you think about the edge? You know, the stores are an edge. Are you putting resources there that sort of mirror this this triplet model? Or is it better to consolidate things in the cloud? I know there are trade-offs in terms of latency. How are you thinking about that? >> All really good questions. It's a challenging area as you can imagine because edges are subject to disconnection, right? Or reduced connection. So we do place the same architecture at the edge. So WCNP runs at the edge, and an application that's designed to run at WCNP can run at the edge. That said, there are a number of very specific considerations that come up when running at the edge, such as the possibility of disconnection or degraded connectivity. And so one of the challenges we have faced and have grappled with and done a good job of I think is dealing with the fact that applications go offline and come back online and have to reconnect and resynchronize, the sort of online offline capability is something that can be quite challenging. And we have a couple of application architectures that sort of form the two core sets of patterns that we use. One is an offline/online synchronization architecture where we discover that we've come back online, and we understand the differences between the online dataset and the offline dataset and how they have to be reconciled. The other is a message-based architecture. And here in our health and wellness domain, we've developed applications that are queue based. So they're essentially business processes that consist of multiple steps where each step has its own queue. And what that allows us to do is devote whatever bandwidth we do have to those pieces of the process that are most latency sensitive and allow the queue lengths to increase in parts of the process that are not latency sensitive, knowing that they will eventually catch up when the bandwidth is restored. And to put that in a little bit of context, we have fiber lengths to all of our locations, and we have I'll just use a round number, 10-ish thousand locations. It's larger than that, but that's the ballpark, and we have fiber to all of them, but when the fiber is disconnected, When the disconnection happens, we're able to fall back to 5G and to Starlink. Starlink is preferred. It's a higher bandwidth. 5G if that fails. But in each of those cases, the bandwidth drops significantly. And so the applications have to be intelligent about throttling back the traffic that isn't essential, so that it can push the essential traffic in those lower bandwidth scenarios. >> So much technology to support this amazing business which started in the early 1960s. Jack, unfortunately, we're out of time. I would love to have you back or some members of your team and drill into how you're using open source, but really thank you so much for explaining the approach that you've taken and participating in SuperCloud2. >> You're very welcome, Dave, and we're happy to come back and talk about other aspects of what we do. For example, we could talk more about the data lakes and the data mesh that we have in place. We could talk more about the directions we might go with serverless. So please look us up again. Happy to chat. >> I'm going to take you up on that, Jack. All right. This is Dave Vellante for John Furrier and the Cube community. Keep it right there for more action from SuperCloud2. (upbeat music)

(upbeat music) >> Welcome back everyone to Supercloud 2, live here in Palo Alto, our studio, where we're doing a live stage performance and virtually syndicating out around the world. I'm John Furrier with Dave Vellante, my co-host with the The Cube here. We've got Kit Colbert, the CTO of VM. We're doing a keynote on Cloud Chaos, the evolution of SuperCloud Architecture Kit. Great to see you, thanks for coming on. >> Yeah, thanks for having me back. It's great to be here for Supercloud 2. >> And so we're going to dig into it. We're going to do a Q&A. We're going to let you present. You got some slides. I really want to get this out there, it's really compelling story. Do the presentation and then we'll come back and discuss. Take it away. >> Yeah, well thank you. So, we had a great time at the original Supercloud event, since then, been talking to a lot of customers, and started to better formulate some of the thinking that we talked about last time So, let's jump into it. Just a few quick slides to sort of set the tone here. So, if we go to the the next slide, what that shows is the journey that we see customers on today, going from what we call Cloud First into this phase that many customers are stuck in, called Cloud Chaos, and where they want to get to, and this is the term customers actually use, we didn't make this up, we heard it from customers. This notion of Cloud Smart, right? How do they use cloud more effectively, more intelligently? Now, if you walk through this journey, customers start with Cloud First. They usually select a single cloud that they're going to standardize on, and when they do that, they have to build out a whole bunch of functionality around that cloud. Things you can see there on the screen, disaster recovery, security, how do they monitor it or govern it? Like, these are things that are non-negotiable, you've got to figure it out, and typically what they do is, they leverage solutions that are specific for that cloud, and that's fine when you have just one cloud. But if we build out here, what we see is that most customers are using more than just one, they're actually using multiple, not necessarily 10 or however many on the screen, but this is just as an example. And so what happens is, they have to essentially duplicate or replicate that stack they've built for each different cloud, and they do so in a kind of a siloed manner. This results in the Cloud Chaos term that that we talked about before. And this is where most businesses out there are, they're using two, maybe three public clouds. They've got some stuff on-prem and they've also got some stuff out at the edge. This is apps, data, et cetera. So, this is the situation, this is sort of that Cloud Chaos. So, the question is, how do we move from this phase to Cloud Smart? And this is where the architecture comes in. This is why architecture, I think, is so important. It's really about moving away from these single cloud services that just solve a problem for one cloud, to something we call a Cross-Cloud service. Something that can support a set of functionality across all clouds, and that means not just public clouds, but also private clouds, edge, et cetera, and when you evolve that across the board, what you get is this sort of Supercloud. This notion that we're talking about here, where you combine these cross-cloud services in many different categories. You can see some examples there on the screen. This is not meant to be a complete set of things, but just examples of what can be done. So, this is sort of the transition and transformation that we're talking about here, and I think the architecture piece comes in both for the individual cloud services as well as that Supercloud concept of how all those services come together. >> Great presentation., thanks for sharing. If you could pop back to that slide, on the Cloud Chaos one. I just want to get your thoughts on something there. This is like the layout of the stack. So, this slide here that I'm showing on the screen, that you presented, okay, take us through that complexity. This is the one where I wanted though, that looks like a spaghetti code mix. >> Yes. >> So, do you turn this into a Supercloud stack, right? Is that? >> well, I think it's, it's an evolving state that like, let's take one of these examples, like security. So, instead of implementing security individually in different ways, using different technologies, different tooling for each cloud, what you would do is say, "Hey, I want a single security solution that works across all clouds", right? A concrete example of this would be secure software supply chain. This is probably one of the top ones that I hear when I talk to customers. How do I know that the software I'm building is truly what I expect it to be, and not something that some hacker has gotten into, and polluted with malicious code? And what they do is that, typically today, their teams have gone off and created individual secure software supply chain solutions for each cloud. So, now they could say, "Hey, I can take a single implementation and just have different endpoints." It could go to Google, or AWS, or on-prem, or wherever have you, right? So, that's the sort of architectural evolution that we're talking about. >> You know, one of the things we hear, Dave, you've been on theCUBE all the time, and we, when we talk privately with customers who are asking us like, what's, what's going on? They have the same complaint, "I don't want to build a team, a dev team, for that stack." So, if you go back to that slide again, you'll see that, that illustrates the tech stack for the clouds and the clouds at the bottom. So, the number one complaint we hear, and I want to get your reaction to that, "I don't want to have a team to have to work on that. So, I'm going to pick one and then have a hedge secondary one, as a backup." Here, that's one, that's four, five, eight, ten, ten environments. >> Yeah, I got a lot. >> That's going to be the reality, so, what's the technical answer to that? >> Yeah, well first of all, let me just say, this picture is again not totally representative of reality oftentimes, because while that picture shows a solution for every cloud, oftentimes that's not the case. Oftentimes it's a line of business going off, starting to use a new cloud. They might solve one or two things, but usually not security, usually not some of these other things, right? So, I think from a technical standpoint, where you want to get to is, yes, that sort of common service, with a common operational team behind it, that is trained on that, that can work across clouds. And that's really I think the important evolution here, is that you don't need to replicate these operational teams, one for each cloud. You can actually have them more focused across all those clouds. >> Yeah, in fact, we were commenting on the opening today. Dave and I were talking about the benefits of the cloud. It's heterogeneous, which is a good thing, but it's complex. There's skill gaps and skill required, but at the end of the day, self-service of the cloud, and the elastic nature of it makes it the benefit. So, if you try to create too many common services, you lose the value of the cloud. So, what's the trade off, in your mind right now as customers start to look at okay, identity, maybe I'll have one single sign on, that's an obvious one. Other ones? What are the areas people are looking at from a combination, common set of services? Where do they start? What's the choices? What are some of the trade offs? 'Cause you can't do it everything. >> No, it's a great question. So, that's actually a really good point and as I answer your question, before I answer your question, the important point about that, as you saw here, you know, across cloud services or these set of Cross-Cloud services, the things that comprise the Supercloud, at least in my view, the point is not necessarily to completely abstract the underlying cloud. The point is to give a business optionality and choice, in terms of what it wants to abstract, and I think that gets to your question, is how much do you actually want to abstract from the underlying cloud? Now, what I find, is that typically speaking, cloud choice is driven at least from a developer or app team perspective, by the best of breed services. What higher level application type services do you need? A database or AI, you know, ML systems, for your application, and that's going to drive your choice of the cloud. So oftentimes, businesses I talk to, want to allow those services to shine through, but for other things that are not necessarily highly differentiated and yet are absolutely critical to creating a successful application, those are things that you want to standardize. Again, like things like security, the supply chain piece, cost management, like these things you need to, and you know, things like cogs become really, really important when you start operating at scale. So, those are the things in it that I see people wanting to focus on. >> So, there's a majority model. >> Yes. >> All right, and we heard of earlier from Walmart, who's fairly, you know, advanced, but at the same time their supercloud is pretty immature. So, what are you seeing in terms of supercloud momentum, crosscloud momentum? What's the starting point for customers? >> Yeah, so it's interesting, right, on that that three-tiered journey that I talked about, this Cloud Smart notion is, that is adoption of what you might call a supercloud or architecture, and most folks aren't there yet. Even the really advanced ones, even the really large ones, and I think it's because of the fact that, we as an industry are still figuring this out. We as an industry did not realize this sort of Cloud Chaos state could happen, right? We didn't, I think most folks thought they could standardize on one cloud and that'd be it, but as time has shown, that's simply not the case. As much as one might try to do that, that's not where you end up. So, I think there's two, there's two things here. Number one, for folks that are early in to the cloud, and are in this Cloud Chaos phase, we see the path out through standardization of these cross-cloud services through adoption of this sort of supercloud architecture, but the other thing I think is particularly exciting, 'cause I talked to a number of of businesses who are not yet in the Cloud Chaos phase. They're earlier on in the cloud journey, and I think the opportunity there is that they don't have to go through Cloud Chaos. They can actually skip that whole phase if they adopt this supercloud architecture from the beginning, and I think being thoughtful around that is really the key here. >> It's interesting, 'cause we're going to hear from Ionis Pharmaceuticals later, and they, yes there are multiple clouds, but the multiple clouds are largely separate, and so it's a business unit using that. So, they're not in Cloud Chaos, but they're not tapping the advantages that you could get for best of breed across those business units. So, to your point, they have an opportunity to actually build that architecture or take advantage of those cross-cloud services, prior to reaching cloud chaos. >> Well, I, actually, you know, I'd love to hear from them if, 'cause you say they're not in Cloud Chaos, but are they, I mean oftentimes I find that each BU, each line of business may feel like they're fine, in of themselves. >> Yes, exactly right, yes. >> But when you look at it from an overall company perspective, they're like, okay, things are pretty chaotic here. We don't have standardization, I don't, you know, like, again, security compliance, these things, especially in many regulated industries, become huge problems when you're trying to run applications across multiple clouds, but you don't have any of those company-wide standardizations. >> Well, this is a point. So, they have a big deal with AstraZeneca, who's got this huge ecosystem, they want to start sharing data across those ecosystem, and that's when they will, you know, that Cloud Chaos will, you know, come, come to fore, you would think. I want to get your take on something that Bob Muglia said earlier, which is, he kind of said, "Hey Dave, you guys got to tighten up your definition a little bit." So, he said a supercloud is a platform that provides programmatically consistent services hosted on heterogeneous cloud providers. So, you know, thank you, that was nice and simple. However others in the community, we're going to hear from Dr. Nelu Mihai later, says, no, no, wait a minute, it's got to be an architecture, not a platform. Where do you land on this architecture v. platform thing? >> I look at it as, I dunno if it's, you call it maturity or just kind of a time horizon thing, but for me when I hear the word platform, I typically think of a single vendor. A single vendor provides this platform. That's kind of the beauty of a platform, is that there is a simplicity usually consistency to it. >> They did the architecture. (laughing) >> Yeah, exactly but I mean, well, there's obviously architecture behind it, has to be, but you as a customer don't necessarily need to deal with that. Now, I think one of the opportunities with Supercloud is that it's not going to be, or there is no single vendor that can solve all these problems. It's got to be the industry coming together as a community, inter-operating, working together, and so, that's why, for me, I think about it as an architecture, that there's got to be these sort of, well-defined categories of functionality. There's got to be well-defined interfaces between those categories of functionality to enable modularity, to enable businesses to be able to pick and choose the right sorts of services, and then weave those together into an overall supercloud. >> Okay, so you're not pitching, necessarily the platform, you're saying, hey, we have an architecture that's open. I go back to something that Vittorio said on August 9th, with the first Supercloud, because as well, remember we talked about abstracting, but at the same time giving developers access to those primitives. So he said, and this, I think your answer sort of confirms this. "I want to have my cake eat it too and not gain weight." >> (laughing) Right. Well and I think that's where the platform aspect can eventually come, after we've gotten aligned architecture, you're going to start to naturally see some vendors step up to take on some of the remaining complexity there. So, I do see platforms eventually emerging here, but I think where we have to start as an industry is around aligning, okay, what does this definition mean? What does that architecture look like? How do we enable interoperability? And then we can take the next step. >> Because it depends too, 'cause I would say Snowflake has a platform, and they've just defined the architecture, but we're not talking about infrastructure here, obviously, we're talking about something else. >> Well, I think that the Snowflake talks about, what he talks about, security and data, you're going to start to see the early movement around areas that are very spanning oriented, and I think that's the beginning of the trend and I think there's going to be a lot more, I think on the infrastructure side. And to your point about the platform architecture, that's actually a really good thought exercise because it actually makes you think about what you're designing in the first place, and that's why I want to get your reaction. >> Quote from- >> Well I just have to interrupt since, later on, you're going to hear from near Nir Zuk of Palo Alto Network. He says architecture and security historically, they don't go hand in hand, 'cause it's a big mess. >> It depends if you're whacking the mole or you actually proactively building something. Well Kit, I want to get your reaction from a quote from someone in our community who said about Supercloud, you know, "The Supercloud's great, there are issues around computer science rigors, and customer requirements." So, there's some issues around the science itself as well as not just listen to the customer, 'cause if that's the case, we'd have a better database, a better Oracle, right, so, but there's other, this tech involved, new tech. We need an open architecture with universal data modeling interconnecting among them, connectivity is a part of security, and then, once we get through that gate, figuring out the technical, the data, and the customer requirements, they say "Supercloud should be a loosely coupled platform with open architecture, plug and play, specialized services, ready for optimization, automation that can stand the test of time." What's your reaction to that sentiment? You like it, is that, does that sound good? >> Yeah, no, broadly aligns with my thinking, I think, and what I see from talking with customers as well. I mean, I like the, again, the, you know, listening to customer needs, prioritizing those things, focusing on some of the connective tissue networking, and data and some of these aspects talking about the open architecture, the interoperability, those are all things I think are absolutely critical. And then, yeah, like I think at the end. >> On the computer science side, do you see some science and engineering things that need to be engineered differently? We heard databases are radically going to change and that are inadequate for the new architecture. What are some of the things like that, from a science standpoint? >> Yeah, yeah, yeah. Some of the more academic research type things. >> More tech, or more better tech or is it? >> Yeah, look, absolutely. I mean I think that there's a bunch around, certainly around the data piece, around, you know, there's issues of data gravity, data mobility. How do you want to do that in a way that's performant? There's definitely issues around security as well. Like how do you enable like trust in these environments, there's got to be some sort of hardware rooted trusts, and you know, a whole bunch of various types of aspects there. >> So, a lot of work still be done. >> Yes, I think so. And that's why I look at this as, this is not a one year thing, or you know, it's going to be multi-years, and I think again, it's about all of us in the industry working together to come to an aligned picture of what that looks like. >> So, as the world's moved from private cloud to public cloud and now Cross-cloud services, supercloud, metacloud, whatever you want to call it, how have you sort of changed the way engineering's organized, developers sort of approached the problem? Has it changed and how? >> Yeah, absolutely. So, you know, it's funny, we at VMware, going through the same challenges as our customers and you know, any business, right? We use multiple clouds, we got a big, of course, on-prem footprint. You know, what we're doing is similar to what I see in many other customers, which, you see the evolution of a platform team, and so the platform team is really in charge of trying to develop a lot of these underlying services to allow our lines of business, our product teams, to be able to move as quickly as possible, to focus on the building, while we help with a lot of the operational overheads, right? We maintain security, compliance, all these other things. We also deal with, yeah, just making the developer's life as simple as possible. So, they do need to know some stuff about, you know, each public cloud they're using, those public cloud services, but at the same, time we can abstract a lot of the details they don't need to be in. So, I think this sort of delineation or separation, I should say, between the underlying platform team and the product teams is a very, very common pattern. >> You know, I noticed the four layers you talked about were observability, infrastructure, security and developers, on that slide, the last slide you had at the top, that was kind of the abstraction key areas that you guys at VMware are working? >> Those were just some groupings that we've come up with, but we like to debate them. >> I noticed data's in every one of them. >> Yeah, yep, data is key. >> It's not like, so, back to the data questions that security is called out as a pillar. Observability is just kind of watching everything, but it's all pretty much data driven. Of the four layers that you see, I take that as areas that you can. >> Standardize. >> Consistently rely on to have standard services. >> Yes. >> Which one do you start with? What's the, is there order of operations? >> Well, that's, I mean. >> 'Cause I think infrastructure's number one, but you had observability, you need to know what's going on. >> Yeah, well it really, it's highly dependent. Again, it depends on the business that we talk to and what, I mean, it really goes back to, what are your business priorities, right? And we have some customers who may want to get out of a data center, they want to evacuate the data center, and so what they want is then, consistent infrastructure, so they can just move those applications up to the cloud. They don't want to have to refactor them and we'll do it later, but there's an immediate and sort of urgent problem that they have. Other customers I talk to, you know, security becomes top of mind, or maybe compliance, because they're in a regulated industry. So, those are the sort of services they want to prioritize. So, I would say there is no single right answer, no one size fits all. The point about this architecture is really around the optionality of it, as it allows you as a business to decide what's most important and where you want to prioritize. >> How about the deployment models kit? Do, does a customer have that flexibility from a deployment model standpoint or do I have to, you know, approach it a specific way? Can you address that? >> Yeah, I mean deployment models, you're talking about how they how they consume? >> So, for instance, yeah, running a control plane in the cloud. >> Got it, got it. >> And communicating elsewhere or having a single global instance or instantiating that instance, and? >> So, that's a good point actually, and you know, the white paper that we released back in August, around this sort of concept, the Cross-cloud service. This is some of the stuff we need to figure out as an industry. So, you know when we talk about a Cross-cloud service, we can mean actually any of the things you just talked about. It could be a single instance that runs, let's say in one public cloud, but it supports all of 'em. Or it could be one that's multi-instance and that runs in each of the clouds, and that customers can take dependencies on whichever one, depending on what their use cases are or the, even going further than that, there's a type of Cross-cloud service that could actually be instantiated even in an air gapped or offline environment, and we have many, many businesses, especially heavily regulated ones that have that requirement, so I think, you know. >> Global don't forget global, regions, locales. >> Yeah, there's all sorts of performance latency issues that can be concerned about. So, most services today are the former, there are single sort of instance or set of instances within a single cloud that support multiple clouds, but I think what we're doing and where we're going with, you know, things like what we see with Kubernetes and service meshes and all these things, will better enable folks to hit these different types of cross-cloud service architectures. So, today, you as a customer probably wouldn't have too much choice, but where we're going, you'll see a lot more choice in the future. >> If you had to summarize for folks watching the importance of Supercloud movement, multi-cloud, cross-cloud services, as an industry in flexible, 'cause I'm always riffing on the whole old school network protocol stacks that got disrupted by TCP/IP, that's a little bit dated, we got people on the chat that are like, you know, 20 years old that weren't even born then. So, but this is a, one of those inflection points that's once in a generation inflection point, I'm sure you agree. What scoped the order of magnitude of the change and the opportunity around the marketplace, the business models, the technology, and ultimately benefits the society. >> Yeah. Wow. Getting bigger. >> You have 10 seconds, go. >> I know. Yeah. (laughing) No, look, so I think it is what we're seeing is really the next phase of what you might call cloud, right? This notion of delivering services, the way they've been packaged together, traditionally by the hyperscalers is now being challenged. and what we're seeing is really opening that up to new levels of innovation, and I think that will be huge for businesses because it'll help meet them where they are. Instead of needing to contort the businesses to, you know, make it work with the technology, the technology will support the business and where it's going. Give people more optionality, more flexibility in order to get there, and I think in the end, for us as individuals, it will just make for better experiences, right? You can get better performance, better interactivity, given that devices are so much of what we do, and so much of what we interact with all the time. This sort of flexibility and optionality will fundamentally better for us as individuals in our experiences. >> And we're seeing that with ChatGPT, everyone's talking about, just early days. There'll be more and more of things like that, that are next gen, like obviously like, wow, that's a fall out of your chair moment. >> It'll be the next wave of innovation that's unleashed. >> All right, Kit Colbert, thanks for coming on and sharing and exploring the Supercloud architecture, Cloud Chaos, the Cloud Smart, there's a transition progression happening and it's happening fast. This is the supercloud wave. If you're not on this wave, you'll be driftwood. That's a Pat Gelsinger quote on theCUBE. This is theCUBE Be right back with more Supercloud coverage, here in Palo Alto after this break. (upbeat music) (upbeat music continues)

>> Now we're recording. >> All right. >> Appreciate that, Hannah. >> Yeah, so I mean, I think in general we continue to do very, very well as a company. I think like everybody, there's economic headwinds today that are unavoidable, but I think we have a couple things going for us. One, we're in the cyberspace, which I think is, for the most part, recession proof as an industry. I think the impact of a recession will impact some vendors and some categories, but in general, I think the industry is pretty resilient. It's like the power industry, no? Recession or not, you still need electricity to your house. Cybersecurity is almost becoming a utility like that as far as the needs of companies go. I think for us, we also have the ability to do the security, the security operations, for a lot of companies, and if you look at the value proposition, the ROI for the cost of less than one to maybe two or three, depending on how big you are as a customer, what you'd have to pay for half to three security operations people, we can give you a full security operations. And so the ROI is is almost kind of brain dead simple, and so that keeps us going pretty well. And I think the other areas, we remove all that complexity for people. So in a world where you got other problems to worry about, handling all the security complexity is something that adds to that ROI. So for us, I think what we're seeing is mostly is some of the larger deals are taking a little bit longer than they have, some of the large enterprise deals, 'cause I think they are being a little more cautious about how they spend it, but in general, business is still kind of cranking along. >> Anything you can share with me that you guys have talked about publicly in terms of any metrics, or what can you tell me other than cranking? >> Yeah, I mean, I would just say we're still very, very high growth, so I think our financial profile would kind of still put us clearly in the cyber unicorn position, but I think other than that, we don't really share business metrics as a private- >> Okay, so how about headcount? >> Still growing. So we're not growing as fast as we've been growing, but I don't think we were anyway. I think we kind of, we're getting to the point of critical mass. We'll start to grow in a more kind of normal course and speed. I don't think we overhired like a lot of companies did in the past, even though we added, almost doubled the size of the company in the last 18 months. So we're still hiring, but very kind of targeted to certain roles going forward 'cause I do think we're kind of at critical mass in some of the other functions. >> You disclose headcount or no? >> We do not. >> You don't, okay. And never have? >> Not that I'm aware of, no. >> Okay, on the macro, I don't know if security's recession proof, but it's less susceptible, let's say. I've had Nikesh Arora on recently, we're at Palo Alto's Ignite, and he was saying, "Look," it's just like you were saying, "Larger deal's a little harder." A lot of times customers, he was saying customers are breaking larger deals into smaller deals, more POCs, more approvals, more people to get through the approval, not whole, blah, blah, blah. Now they're a different animal, I understand, but are you seeing similar trends, and how are you dealing with that? >> Yeah, I think the exact same trends, and I think it's just in a world where spending a dollar matters, I think a lot more oversight comes into play, a lot more reviewers, and can you shave it down here? Can you reduce the scope of the project to save money there? And I think it just caused a lot of those things. I think, in the large enterprise, I think most of those deals for companies like us and Palo and CrowdStrike and kind of the upper tier companies, they'll still go through. I think they'll just going to take a lot longer, and, yeah, maybe they're 80% of what they would've been otherwise, but there's still a lot of business to be had out there. >> So how are you dealing with that? I mean, you're talking about you double the size of the company. Is it kind of more focused on go-to-market, more sort of, maybe not overlay, but sort of SE types that are going to be doing more handholding. How have you dealt with that? Or have you just sort of said, "Hey, it is what it is, and we're not going to, we're not going to tactically respond to. We got long-term direction"? >> Yeah, I think it's more the latter. I think for us, it's we've gone through all these things before. It just takes longer now. So a lot of the steps we're taking are the same steps. We're still involved in a lot of POCs, we're involved in a lot of demos, and I don't think that changed. It's just the time between your POC and when someone sends you the PO, there's five more people now got to review things and go through a budget committee and all sorts of stuff like that. I think where we're probably focused more now is adding more and more capabilities just so we continue to be on the front foot of innovation and being relevant to the market, and trying to create more differentiators for us and the competitors. That's something that's just built into our culture, and we don't want to slow that down. And so even though the business is still doing extremely, extremely well, we want to keep investing in kind of technology. >> So the deal size, is it fair to say the initial deal size for new accounts, while it may be smaller, you're adding more capabilities, and so over time, your average contract values will go up? Are you seeing that trend? Or am I- >> Well, I would say I don't even necessarily see our average deal size has gotten smaller. I think in total, it's probably gotten a little bigger. I think what happens is when something like this happens, the old cream rises to the top thing, I think, comes into play, and you'll see some organizations instead of doing a deal with three or four vendors, they may want to pick one or two and really kind of put a lot of energy behind that. For them, they're maybe spending a little less money, but for those vendors who are amongst those getting chosen, I think they're doing pretty good. So our average deal size is pretty stable. For us, it's just a temporal thing. It's just the larger deals take a little bit longer. I don't think we're seeing much of a deal velocity difference in our mid-market commercial spaces, but in the large enterprise it's a little bit slower. But for us, we have ambitious plans in our strategy or on how we want to execute and what we want to build, and so I think we want to just continue to make sure we go down that path technically. >> So I have some questions on sort of the target markets and the cohorts you're going after, and I have some product questions. I know we're somewhat limited on time, but the historical focus has been on SMB, and I know you guys have gone in into enterprise. I'm curious as to how that's going. Any guidance you can give me on mix? Or when I talk to the big guys, right, you know who they are, the big managed service providers, MSSPs, and they're like, "Poo poo on Arctic Wolf," like, "Oh, they're (groans)." I said, "Yeah, that's what they used to say about the PC. It's just a toy. Or Microsoft SQL Server." But so I kind of love that narrative for you guys, but I'm curious from your words as to, what is that enterprise? How's the historical business doing, and how's the entrance into the enterprise going? What kind of hurdles are you having, blockers are you having to remove? Any color you can give me there would be super helpful. >> Yeah, so I think our commercial S&B business continues to do really good. Our mid-market is a very strong market for us. And I think while a lot of companies like to focus purely on large enterprise, there's a lot more mid-market companies, and a much larger piece of the IT puzzle collectively is in mid-market than it is large enterprise. That being said, we started to get pulled into the large enterprise not because we're a toy but because we're quite a comprehensive service. And so I think what we're trying to do from a roadmap perspective is catch up with some of the kind of capabilities that a large enterprise would want from us that a potential mid-market customer wouldn't. In some case, it's not doing more. It's just doing it different. Like, so we have a very kind of hands-on engagement with some of our smaller customers, something we call our concierge. Some of the large enterprises want more of a hybrid where they do some stuff and you do some stuff. And so kind of building that capability into the platform is something that's really important for us. Just how we engage with them as far as giving 'em access to their data, the certain APIs they want, things of that nature, what we're building out for large enterprise, but the demand by large enterprise on our business is enormous. And so it's really just us kind of catching up with some of the kind of the features that they want that we lack today, but many of 'em are still signing up with us, obviously, and in lieu of that, knowing that it's coming soon. And so I think if you look at the growth of our large enterprise, it's one of our fastest growing segments, and I think it shows anything but we're a toy. I would be shocked, frankly, if there's an MSSP, and, of course, we don't see ourself as an MSSP, but I'd be shocked if any of them operate a platform at the scale that ours operates. >> Okay, so wow. A lot I want to unpack there. So just to follow up on that last question, you don't see yourself as an MSSP because why, you see yourselves as a technology platform? >> Yes, I mean, the vast, vast, vast majority of what we deliver is our own technology. So we integrate with third-party solutions mostly to bring in that telemetry. So we've built our own platform from the ground up. We have our own threat intelligence, our own detection logic. We do have our own agents and network sensors. MSSP is typically cobbling together other tools, third party off-the-shelf tools to run their SOC. Ours is all homegrown technology. So I have a whole group called Arctic Wolf Labs, is building, just cranking out ML-based detections, building out infrastructure to take feeds in from a variety of different sources. We have a full integration kind of effort where we integrate into other third parties. So when we go into a customer, we can leverage whatever they have, but at the same time, we produce some tech that if they're lacking in a certain area, we can provide that tech, particularly around things like endpoint agents and network sensors and the like. >> What about like identity, doing your own identity? >> So we don't do our own identity, but we take feeds in from things like Okta and Active Directory and the like, and we have detection logic built on top of that. So part of our value add is we were XDR before XDR was the cool thing to talk about, meaning we can look across multiple attack surfaces and come to a security conclusion where most EDR vendors started with looking just at the endpoint, right? And then they called themselves XDR because now they took in a network feed, but they still looked at it as a separate network detection. We actually look at the things across multiple attack surfaces and stitch 'em together to look at that from a security perspective. In some cases we have automatic detections that will fire. In other cases, we can surface some to a security professional who can go start pulling on that thread. >> So you don't need to purchase CrowdStrike software and integrate it. You have your own equivalent essentially. >> Well, we'll take a feed from the CrowdStrike endpoint into our platform. We don't have to rely on their detections and their alerts, and things of that nature. Now obviously anything they discover we pull in as well, it's just additional context, but we have all our own tech behind it. So we operate kind of at an MSSP scale. We have a similar value proposition in the sense that we'll use whatever the customer has, but once that data kind of comes into our pipeline, it's all our own homegrown tech from there. >> But I mean, what I like about the MSSP piece of your business is it's very high touch. It's very intimate. What I like about what you're saying is that it's software-like economics, so software, software-like part of it. >> That's what makes us the unicorn, right? Is we do have, our concierges is very hands-on. We continue to drive automation that makes our concierge security professionals more efficient, but we always want that customer to have that concierge person as, is almost an extension to their security team, or in some cases, for companies that don't even have a security team, as their security team. As we go down the path, as I mentioned, one of the things we want to be able to do is start to have a more flexible model where we can have that high touch if you want it. We can have the high touch on certain occasions, and you can do stuff. We can have low touch, like we can span the spectrum, but we never want to lose our kind of unique value proposition around the concierge, but we also want to make sure that we're providing an interface that any customer would want to use. >> So given that sort of software-like economics, I mean, services companies need this too, but especially in software, things like net revenue retention and churn are super important. How are those metrics looking? What can you share with me there? >> Yeah, I mean, again, we don't share those metrics publicly, but all's I can continue to repeat is, if you looked at all of our financial metrics, I think you would clearly put us in the unicorn category. I think very few companies are going to have the level of growth that we have on the amount of ARR that we have with the net revenue retention and the churn and upsell. All those aspects continue to be very, very strong for us. >> I want to go back to the sort of enterprise conversation. So large enterprises would engage with you as a complement to their existing SOC, correct? Is that a fair statement or not necessarily? >> It's in some cases. In some cases, they're looking to not have a SOC. So we run into a lot of cases where they want to replace their SIEM, and they want a solution like Arctic Wolf to do that. And so there's a poll, I can't remember, I think it was Forrester, IDC, one of them did it a couple years ago, and they found out that 70% of large enterprises do not want to build the SOC, and it's not 'cause they don't need one, it's 'cause they can't afford it, they can't staff it, they don't have the expertise. And you think about if you're a tech company or a bank, or something like that, of course you can do it, but if you're an international plumbing distributor, you're not going to (chuckles), someone's not going to graduate from Stanford with a cybersecurity degree and go, "Cool, I want to go work for a plumbing distributor in their SOC," right? So they're going to have trouble kind of bringing in the right talent, and as a result, it's difficult to go make a multimillion-dollar investment into a SOC if you're not going to get the quality people to operate it, so they turn to companies like us. >> Got it, so, okay, so you're talking earlier about capabilities that large enterprises require that there might be some gaps, you might lack some features. A couple questions there. One is, when you do some of those, I inferred some of that is integrations. Are those integrations sort of one-off snowflakes or are you finding that you're able to scale those across the large enterprises? That's my first question. >> Yeah, so most of the integrations are pretty straightforward. I think where we run into things that are kind of enterprise-centric, they definitely want open APIs, they want access to our platform, which we don't do today, which we are going to be doing, but we don't do that yet today. They want to do more of a SIEM replacement. So we're really kind of what we call an open XDR platform, so there's things that we would need to build to kind of do raw log ingestion. I mean, we do this today. We have raw log ingestion, we have log storage, we have log searching, but there's like some of the compliance scenarios that they need out of their SIEM. We don't do those today. And so that's kind of holding them back from getting off their SIEM and going fully onto a solution like ours. Then the other one is kind of the level of customization, so the ability to create a whole bunch of custom rules, and that ties back to, "I want to get off my SIEM. I've built all these custom rules in my SIEM, and it's great that you guys do all this automatic AI stuff in the background, but I need these very specific things to be executed on." And so trying to build an interface for them to be able to do that and then also simulate it, again, because, no matter how big they are running their SIEM and their SOC... Like, we talked to one of the largest financial institutions in the world. As far as we were told, they have the largest individual company SOC in the world, and we operate almost 15 times their size. So we always have to be careful because this is a cloud-based native platform, but someone creates some rule that then just craters the performance of the whole platform, so we have to build kind of those guardrails around it. So those are the things primarily that the large enterprises are asking for. Most of those issues are not holding them back from coming. They want to know they're coming, and we're working on all of those. >> Cool, and see, just aside, I was talking to CISO the other day, said, "If it weren't for my compliance and audit group, I would chuck my SIEM." I mean, everybody wants to get rid of their SIEM. >> I've never met anyone who likes their SIEM. >> Do you feel like you've achieved product market fit in the larger enterprise or is that still something that you're sorting out? >> So I think we know, like, we're on a path to do that. We're on a provable path to do that, so I don't think there's any surprises left. I think everything that we know we need to do for that is someone's writing code for it today. It's just a matter of getting it through the system and getting into production. So I feel pretty good about it. I think that's why we are seeing such a high growth rate in our large enterprise business, 'cause we share that feedback with some of those key customers. We have a Customer Advisory Board that we share a lot of this information with. So yeah, I mean, I feel pretty good about what we need to do. We're certainly operate at large enterprise scales, so taking in the amount of the volume of data they're going to have and the types of integrations they need. We're comfortable with that. It's just more or less the interfaces that a large enterprise would want that some of the smaller companies don't ask for. >> Do you have enough tenure in the market to get a sense as to stickiness or even indicators that will lead toward retention? Have you been at it long enough in the enterprise or you still, again, figuring that out? >> Yeah, no, I think we've been at it long enough, and our retention rates are extremely high. If anything, kind of our net retention rates, well over 100% 'cause we have opportunities to upsell into new modules and expanding the coverage of what they have today. I think the areas that if you cornered enterprise that use us and things they would complain about are things I just told you about, right? There's still some things I want to do in my Splunk, and I need an API to pull my data out and put it in my Splunk and stuff like that, and those are the things we want to enable. >> Yeah, so I can't wait till you guys go public because you got Snowflake up here, and you got Veritas down here, and I'm very curious as to where you guys go. When's the IPO? You want to tell me that? (chuckling) >> Unfortunately, it's not up to us right now. You got to get the markets- >> Yeah, I hear you. Right, if the market were better. Well, if the market were better, you think you'd be out? >> Yeah, I mean, we'd certainly be a viable candidate to go. >> Yeah, there you go. I have a question for you because I don't have a SOC. I run a small business with my co-CEO. We're like 30, 40 people W-2s, we got another 50 or so contractors, and I'm always like have one eye, sleep with one eye open 'cause of security. What is your ideal SMB customer? Think S. >> Yeah. >> Would I fit? >> Yeah, I mean you're you're right in the sweet spot. I think where the company started and where we still have a lot of value proposition, which is companies like, like you said it, you sleep with one eye open, but you don't have necessarily the technical acumen to be able to do that security for yourself, and that's where we fit in. We bring kind of this whole security, we call it Security Operations Cloud, to bear, and we have some of the best professionals in the world who can basically be your SOC for less than it would cost you to hire somebody right out of college to do IT stuff. And so the value proposition's there. You're going to get the best of the best, providing you a kind of a security service that you couldn't possibly build on your own, and that way you can go to bed at night and close both eyes. >> So (chuckling) I'm sure something else would keep me up. But so in thinking about that, our Amazon bill keeps growing and growing and growing. What would it, and I presume I can engage with you on a monthly basis, right? As a consumption model, or how's the pricing work? >> Yeah, so there's two models that we have. So typically the kind of the monthly billing type of models would be through one of our MSP partners, where they have monthly billing capabilities. Usually direct with us is more of a longer term deal, could be one, two, or three, or it's up to the customer. And so we have both of those engagement models. Were doing more and more and more through MSPs today because of that model you just described, and they do kind of target the very S in the SMB as well. >> I mean, rough numbers, even ranges. If I wanted to go with the MSP monthly, I mean, what would a small company like mine be looking at a month? >> Honestly, I do not even know the answer to that. >> We're not talking hundreds of thousands of dollars a month? >> No. God, no. God, no. No, no, no. >> I mean, order of magnitude, we're talking thousands, tens of thousands? >> Thousands, on a monthly basis. Yeah. >> Yeah, yeah. Thousands per month. So if I were to budget between 20 and $50,000 a year, I'm definitely within the envelope. Is that fair? I mean, I'm giving a wide range >> That's fair. just to try to make- >> No, that's fair. >> And if I wanted to go direct with you, I would be signing up for a longer term agreement, correct, like I do with Salesforce? >> Yeah, yeah, a year. A year would, I think, be the minimum for that, and, yeah, I think the budget you set aside is kind of right in the sweet spot there. >> Yeah, I'm interested, I'm going to... Have a sales guy call me (chuckles) somehow. >> All right, will do. >> No, I'm serious. I want to start >> I will. >> investigating these things because we sell to very large organizations. I mean, name a tech company. That's our client base, except for Arctic Wolf. We should talk about that. And increasingly they're paranoid about data protection agreements, how you're protecting your data, our data. We write a lot of software and deliver it as part of our services, so it's something that's increasingly important. It's certainly a board level discussion and beyond, and most large organizations and small companies oftentimes don't think about it or try not to. They just put their head in the sand and, "We don't want to be doing that," so. >> Yeah, I will definitely have someone get in touch with you. >> Cool. Let's see. Anything else you can tell me on the product side? Are there things that you're doing that we talked about, the gaps at the high end that you're, some of the features that you're building in, which was super helpful. Anything in the SMB space that you want to share? >> Yeah, I think the biggest thing that we're doing technically now is really trying to drive more and more automation and efficiency through our operations, and that comes through really kind of a generous use of AI. So building models around more efficient detections based upon signal, but also automating the actions of our operators so we can start to learn through the interface. When they do A and B, they always do C. Well, let's just do C for them, stuff like that. Then also building more automation as far as the response back to third-party solutions as well so we can remediate more directly on third-party products without having to get into the consoles or having our customers do it. So that's really just trying to drive efficiency in the system, and that helps provide better security outcomes but also has a big impact on our margins as well. >> I know you got to go, but I want to show you something real quick. I have data. I do a weekly program called "Breaking Analysis," and I have a partner called ETR, Enterprise Technology Research, and they have a platform. I don't know if you can see this. They have a survey platform, and each quarter, they do a survey of about 1,500 IT decision makers. They also have a survey on, they call ETS, Emerging Technology Survey. So it's private companies. And I don't want to go into it too much, but this is a sentiment graph. This is net sentiment. >> Just so you know, all I see is a white- >> Yeah, just a white bar. >> Oh, that's weird. Oh, whiteboard. Oh, here we go. How about that? >> There you go. >> Yeah, so this is a sentiment graph. So this is net sentiment and this is mindshare. And if I go to Arctic Wolf... So it's typical security, right? The 8,000 companies. And when I go here, what impresses me about this is you got a decent mindshare, that's this axis, but you've also got an N in the survey. It's about 1,500 in the survey, It's 479 Arctic Wolf customers responded to this. 57% don't know you. Oh, sorry, they're aware of you, but no plan to evaluate; 19% plan to evaluate, 7% are evaluating; 11%, no plan to utilize even though they've evaluated you; and 1% say they've evaluated you and plan to utilize. It's a small percentage, but actually it's not bad in the random sample of the world about that. And so obviously you want to get that number up, but this is a really impressive position right here that I wanted to just share with you. I do a lot of analysis weekly, and this is a really, it's completely independent survey, and you're sort of separating from the pack, as you can see. So kind of- >> Well, it's good to see that. And I think that just is a further indicator of what I was telling you. We continue to have a strong financial performance. >> Yeah, in a good market. Okay, well, thanks you guys. And hey, if I can get this recording, Hannah, I may even figure out how to write it up. (chuckles) That would be super helpful. >> Yes. We'll get that up. >> And David or Hannah, if you can send me David's contact info so I can get a salesperson in touch with him. (Hannah chuckling) >> Yeah, great. >> Yeah, we'll work on that as well. Thanks so much for both your time. >> Thanks a lot. It was great talking with you. >> Thanks, you guys. Great to meet you. >> Thank you. >> Bye. >> Bye.

>> Okay, so now that we've heard Scott talk about smart data fabrics, it's time to see this in action. Right now we're joined by Jess Jowdy, who's the manager of Healthcare Field Engineering at InterSystems. She's going to give a demo of how smart data fabrics actually work, and she's going to show how embedding a wide range of analytics capabilities including data exploration, business intelligence natural language processing, and machine learning directly within the fabric, makes it faster and easier for organizations to gain new insights and power intelligence, predictive and prescriptive services and applications. Now, according to InterSystems, smart data fabrics are applicable across many industries from financial services to supply chain to healthcare and more. Jess today is going to be speaking through the lens of a healthcare focused demo. Don't worry, Joe Lichtenberg will get into some of the other use cases that you're probably interested in hearing about. That will be in our third segment, but for now let's turn it over to Jess. Jess, good to see you. >> Hi. Yeah, thank you so much for having me. And so for this demo we're really going to be bucketing these features of a smart data fabric into four different segments. We're going to be dealing with connections, collections, refinements and analysis. And so we'll see that throughout the demo as we go. So without further ado, let's just go ahead and jump into this demo and you'll see my screen pop up here. I actually like to start at the end of the demo. So I like to begin by illustrating what an end user's going to see and don't mind the screen 'cause I gave you a little sneak peek of what's about to happen. But essentially what I'm going to be doing is using Postman to simulate a call from an external application. So we talked about being in the healthcare industry. This could be for instance, a mobile application that a patient is using to view an aggregated summary of information across that patient's continuity of care or some other kind of application. So we might be pulling information in this case from an electronic medical record. We might be grabbing clinical history from that. We might be grabbing clinical notes from a medical transcription software or adverse reaction warnings from a clinical risk grouping application and so much more. So I'm really going to be assimilating a patient logging on in on their phone and retrieving this information through this Postman call. So what I'm going to do is I'm just going to hit send, I've already preloaded everything here and I'm going to be looking for information where the last name of this patient is Simmons and their medical record number their patient identifier in the system is 32345. And so as you can see I have this single JSON payload that showed up here of just relevant clinical information for my patient whose last name is Simmons all within a single response. So fantastic, right? Typically though when we see responses that look like this there is an assumption that this service is interacting with a single backend system and that single backend system is in charge of packaging that information up and returning it back to this caller. But in a smart data fabric architecture we're able to expand the scope to handle information across different, in this case, clinical applications. So how did this actually happen? Let's peel back another layer and really take a look at what happened in the background. What you're looking at here is our mission control center for our smart data fabric. On the left we have our APIs that allow users to interact with particular services. On the right we have our connections to our different data silos. And in the middle here we have our data fabric coordinator which is going to be in charge of this refinement and analysis those key pieces of our smart data fabric. So let's look back and think about the example we just showed. I received an inbound request for information for a patient whose last name is Simmons. My end user is requesting to connect to that service and that's happening here at my patient data retrieval API location. Users can define any number of different services and APIs depending on their use cases. And to that end we do also support full lifecycle API management within this platform. When you're dealing with APIs I always like to make a little shout out on this that you really want to make sure you have enough like a granular enough security model to handle and limit which APIs and which services a consumer can interact with. In this IRIS platform, which we're talking about today we have a very granular role-based security model that allows you to handle that, but it's really important in a smart data fabric to consider who's accessing your data and in what contact. >> Can I just interrupt you for a second? >> Yeah, please. >> So you were showing on the left hand side of the demo a couple of APIs. I presume that can be a very long list. I mean, what do you see as typical? >> I mean you can have hundreds of these APIs depending on what services an organization is serving up for their consumers. So yeah, we've seen hundreds of these services listed here. >> So my question is, obviously security is critical in the healthcare industry and API securities are really hot topic these days. How do you deal with that? >> Yeah, and I think API security is interesting 'cause it can happen at so many layers. So there's interactions with the API itself. So can I even see this API and leverage it? And then within an API call, you then have to deal with all right, which end points or what kind of interactions within that API am I allowed to do? What data am I getting back? And with healthcare data, the whole idea of consent to see certain pieces of data is critical. So the way that we handle that is, like I said, same thing at different layers. There is access to a particular API, which can happen within the IRIS product and also we see it happening with an API management layer, which has become a really hot topic with a lot of organizations. And then when it comes to data security, that really happens under the hood within your smart data fabric. So that role-based access control becomes very important in assigning, you know, roles and permissions to certain pieces of information. Getting that granular becomes the cornerstone of security. >> And that's been designed in, >> Absolutely, yes. it's not a bolt-on as they like to say. Okay, can we get into collect now? >> Of course, we're going to move on to the collection piece at this point in time, which involves pulling information from each of my different data silos to create an overall aggregated record. So commonly each data source requires a different method for establishing connections and collecting this information. So for instance, interactions with an EMR may require leveraging a standard healthcare messaging format like FIRE, interactions with a homegrown enterprise data warehouse for instance may use SQL for a cloud-based solutions managed by a vendor. They may only allow you to use web service calls to pull data. So it's really important that your data fabric platform that you're using has the flexibility to connect to all of these different systems and and applications. And I'm about to log out so I'm going to keep my session going here. So therefore it's incredibly important that your data fabric has the flexibility to connect to all these different kinds of applications and data sources and all these different kinds of formats and over all of these different kinds of protocols. So let's think back on our example here. I had four different applications that I was requesting information for to create that payload that we saw initially. Those are listed here under this operations section. So these are going out and connecting to downstream systems to pull information into my smart data fabric. What's great about the IRIS platform is it has an embedded interoperability platform. So there's all of these native adapters that can support these common connections that we see for different kinds of applications. So using REST or SOAP or SQL or FTP regardless of that protocol there's an adapter to help you work with that. And we also think of the types of formats that we typically see data coming in as, in healthcare we have H7, we have FIRE we have CCDs across the industry. JSON is, you know, really hitting a market strong now and XML, payloads, flat files. We need to be able to handle all of these different kinds of formats over these different kinds of protocols. So to illustrate that, if I click through these when I select a particular connection on the right side panel I'm going to see the different settings that are associated with that particular connection that allows me to collect information back into my smart data fabric. In this scenario, my connection to my chart script application in this example communicates over a SOAP connection. When I'm grabbing information from my clinical risk grouping application I'm using a SQL based connection. When I'm connecting to my EMR I'm leveraging a standard healthcare messaging format known as FIRE, which is a rest based protocol. And then when I'm working with my health record management system I'm leveraging a standard HTTP adapter. So you can see how we can be flexible when dealing with these different kinds of applications and systems. And then it becomes important to be able to validate that you've established those connections correctly and be able to do it in a reliable and quick way. Because if you think about it, you could have hundreds of these different kinds of applications built out and you want to make sure that you're maintaining and understanding those connections. So I can actually go ahead and test one of these applications and put in, for instance my patient's last name and their MRN and make sure that I'm actually getting data back from that system. So it's a nice little sanity check as we're building out that data fabric to ensure that we're able to establish these connections appropriately. So turnkey adapters are fantastic, as you can see we're leveraging them all here, but sometimes these connections are going to require going one step further and building something really specific for an application. So let's, why don't we go one step further here and talk about doing something custom or doing something innovative. And so it's important for users to have the ability to develop and go beyond what's an out of the box or black box approach to be able to develop things that are specific to their data fabric or specific to their particular connection. In this scenario, the IRIS data platform gives users access to the entire underlying code base. So you cannot, you not only get an opportunity to view how we're establishing these connections or how we're building out these processes but you have the opportunity to inject your own kind of processing your own kinds of pipelines into this. So as an example, you can leverage any number of different programming languages right within this pipeline. And so I went ahead and I injected Python. So Python is a very up and coming language, right? We see more and more developers turning towards Python to do their development. So it's important that your data fabric supports those kinds of developers and users that have standardized on these kinds of programming languages. This particular script here, as you can see actually calls out to our turnkey adapters. So we see a combination of out of the box code that is provided in this data fabric platform from IRIS combined with organization specific or user specific customizations that are included in this Python method. So it's a nice little combination of how do we bring the developer experience in and mix it with out of the box capabilities that we can provide in a smart data fabric. >> Wow. >> Yeah, I'll pause. >> It's a lot here. You know, actually, if I could >> I can pause. >> If I just want to sort of play that back. So we went through the connect and the collect phase. >> And the collect, yes, we're going into refine. So it's a good place to stop. >> Yeah, so before we get there, so we heard a lot about fine grain security, which is crucial. We heard a lot about different data types, multiple formats. You've got, you know the ability to bring in different dev tools. We heard about FIRE, which of course big in healthcare. >> Absolutely. >> And that's the standard and then SQL for traditional kind of structured data and then web services like HTTP you mentioned. And so you have a rich collection of capabilities within this single platform. >> Absolutely, and I think that's really important when you're dealing with a smart data fabric because what you're effectively doing is you're consolidating all of your processing, all of your collection into a single platform. So that platform needs to be able to handle any number of different kinds of scenarios and technical challenges. So you've got to pack that platform with as many of these features as you can to consolidate that processing. >> All right, so now we're going into refine. >> We're going into refinement, exciting. So how do we actually do refinement? Where does refinement happen and how does this whole thing end up being performant? Well the key to all of that is this SDF coordinator or stands for smart data fabric coordinator. And what this particular process is doing is essentially orchestrating all of these calls to all of these different downstream systems. It's aggregating, it's collecting that information it's aggregating it and it's refining it into that single payload that we saw get returned to the user. So really this coordinator is the main event when it comes to our data fabric. And in the IRIS platform we actually allow users to build these coordinators using web-based tool sets to make it intuitive. So we can take a sneak peek at what that looks like and as you can see it follows a flow chart like structure. So there's a start, there is an end and then there are these different arrows that point to different activities throughout the business process. And so there's all these different actions that are being taken within our coordinator. You can see an action for each of the calls to each of our different data sources to go retrieve information. And then we also have the sync call at the end that is in charge of essentially making sure that all of those responses come back before we package them together and send them out. So this becomes really crucial when we're creating that data fabric. And you know, this is a very simple data fabric example where we're just grabbing data and we're consolidating it together. But you can have really complex orchestrators and coordinators that do any number of different things. So for instance, I could inject SQL Logic into this or SQL code, I can have conditional logic, I can do looping, I can do error trapping and handling. So we're talking about a whole number of different features that can be included in this coordinator. So like I said, we have a really very simple process here that's just calling out, grabbing all those different data elements from all those different data sources and consolidating it. We'll look back at this coordinator in a second when we introduce or we make this data fabric a bit smarter and we start introducing that analytics piece to it. So this is in charge of the refinement. And so at this point in time we've looked at connections, collections, and refinements. And just to summarize what we've seen 'cause I always like to go back and take a look at everything that we've seen. We have our initial API connection we have our connections to our individual data sources and we have our coordinators there in the middle that are in charge of collecting the data and refining it into a single payload. As you can imagine, there's a lot going on behind the scenes of a smart data fabric, right? There's all these different processes that are interacting. So it's really important that your smart data fabric platform has really good traceability, really good logging 'cause you need to be able to know, you know, if there was an issue, where did that issue happen, in which connected process and how did it affect the other processes that are related to it. In IRIS, we have this concept called a visual trace. And what our clients use this for is basically to be able to step through the entire history of a request from when it initially came into the smart data fabric to when data was sent back out from that smart data fabric. So I didn't record the time but I bet if you recorded the time it was this time that we sent that request in. And you can see my patient's name and their medical record number here and you can see that that instigated four different calls to four different systems and they're represented by these arrows going out. So we sent something to chart script to our health record management system, to our clinical risk grouping application into my EMR through their FIRE server. So every request, every outbound application gets a request and we pull back all of those individual pieces of information from all of those different systems and we bundle them together. And for my FIRE lovers, here's our FIRE bundle that we got back from our FIRE server. So this is a really good way of being able to validate that I am appropriately grabbing the data from all these different applications and then ultimately consolidating it into one payload. Now we change this into a JSON format before we deliver it, but this is those data elements brought together. And this screen would also be used for being able to see things like error trapping or errors that were thrown alerts, warnings, developers might put log statements in just to validate that certain pieces of code are executing. So this really becomes the one stop shop for understanding what's happening behind the scenes with your data fabric. >> Etcher, who did what, when, where what did the machine do? What went wrong and where did that go wrong? >> Exactly. >> Right in your fingertips. >> Right, and I'm a visual person so a bunch of log files to me is not the most helpful. Well, being able to see this happened at this time in this location gives me that understanding I need to actually troubleshoot a problem. >> This business orchestration piece, can you say a little bit more about that? How people are using it? What's the business impact of the business orchestration? >> The business orchestration, especially in the smart data fabric is really that crucial part of being able to create a smart data fabric. So think of your business orchestrator as doing the heavy lifting of any kind of processing that involves data, right? It's bringing data in, it's analyzing that information, it's transforming that data, in a format that your consumer's not going to understand it's doing any additional injection of custom logic. So really your coordinator or that orchestrator that sits in the middle is the brains behind your smart data fabric. >> And this is available today? This all works? >> It's all available today. Yeah, it all works. And we have a number of clients that are using this technology to support these kinds of use cases. >> Awesome demo. Anything else you want to show us? >> Well we can keep going. 'Cause right now, I mean we can, oh, we're at 18 minutes. God help us. You can cut some of this. (laughs) I have a lot to say, but really this is our data fabric. The core competency of IRIS is making it smart, right? So I won't spend too much time on this but essentially if we go back to our coordinator here we can see here's that original that pipeline that we saw where we're pulling data from all these different systems and we're collecting it and we're sending it out. But then we see two more at the end here which involves getting a readmission prediction and then returning a prediction. So we can not only deliver data back as part of a smart data fabric but we can also deliver insights back to users and consumers based on data that we've aggregated as part of a smart data fabric. So in this scenario, we're actually taking all that data that we just looked at and we're running it through a machine learning model that exists within the smart data fabric pipeline and producing a readmission score to determine if this particular patient is at risk for readmission within the next 30 days. Which is a typical problem that we see in the healthcare space. So what's really exciting about what we're doing in the IRIS world is we're bringing analytics close to the data with integrated ML. So in this scenario we're actually creating the model, training the model, and then executing the model directly within the IRIS platform. So there's no shuffling of data, there's no external connections to make this happen. And it doesn't really require having a PhD in data science to understand how to do that. It leverages all really basic SQL like syntax to be able to construct and execute these predictions. So it's going one step further than the traditional data fabric example to introduce this ability to define actionable insights to our users based on the data that we've brought together. >> Well that readmission probability is huge. >> Yes. >> Right, because it directly affects the cost of for the provider and the patient, you know. So if you can anticipate the probability of readmission and either do things at that moment or you know, as an outpatient perhaps to minimize the probability then that's huge. That drops right to the bottom line. >> Absolutely, absolutely. And that really brings us from that data fabric to that smart data fabric at the end of the day which is what makes this so exciting. >> Awesome demo. >> Thank you. >> Fantastic people, are you cool? If people want to get in touch with you? >> Oh yes, absolutely. So you can find me on LinkedIn, Jessica Jowdy and we'd love to hear from you. I always love talking about this topic, so would be happy to engage on that. >> Great stuff, thank you Jess, appreciate it. >> Thank you so much. >> Okay, don't go away because in the next segment we're going to dig into the use cases where data fabric is driving business value. Stay right there.

>> From the Cube Studios in Palo Alto in Boston bringing you data-driven insights from the Cube and ETR. This is Breaking Analysis with Dave Vellante. >> The unraveling of market enthusiasm continued in Q4 of 2022 with the earnings reports from the US hyperscalers, the big three now all in. As we said earlier this year, even the cloud is an immune from the macro headwinds and the cracks in the armor that we saw from the data that we shared last summer, they're playing out into 2023. For the most part actuals are disappointing beyond expectations including our own. It turns out that our estimates for the big three hyperscaler's revenue missed by 1.2 billion or 2.7% lower than we had forecast from even our most recent November estimates. And we expect continued decelerating growth rates for the hyperscalers through the summer of 2023 and we don't think that's going to abate until comparisons get easier. Hello and welcome to this week's Wikibon Cube Insights powered by ETR. In this Breaking Analysis, we share our view of what's happening in cloud markets not just for the hyperscalers but other firms that have hitched a ride on the cloud. And we'll share new ETR data that shows why these trends are playing out tactics that customers are employing to deal with their cost challenges and how long the pain is likely to last. You know, riding the cloud wave, it's a two-edged sword. Let's look at the players that have gone all in on or are exposed to both the positive and negative trends of cloud. Look the cloud has been a huge tailwind for so many companies like Snowflake and Databricks, Workday, Salesforce, Mongo's move with Atlas, Red Hats Cloud strategy with OpenShift and so forth. And you know, the flip side is because cloud is elastic what comes up can also go down very easily. Here's an XY graphic from ETR that shows spending momentum or net score on the vertical axis and market presence in the dataset on the horizontal axis provision or called overlap. This is data from the January 2023 survey and that the red dotted lines show the positions of several companies that we've highlighted going back to January 2021. So let's unpack this for a bit starting with the big three hyperscalers. The first point is AWS and Azure continue to solidify their moat relative to Google Cloud platform. And we're going to get into this in a moment, but Azure and AWS revenues are five to six times that of GCP for IaaS. And at those deltas, Google should be gaining ground much faster than the big two. The second point on Google is notice the red line on GCP relative to its starting point. While it appears to be gaining ground on the horizontal axis, its net score is now below that of AWS and Azure in the survey. So despite its significantly smaller size it's just not keeping pace with the leaders in terms of market momentum. Now looking at AWS and Microsoft, what we see is basically AWS is holding serve. As we know both Google and Microsoft benefit from including SaaS in their cloud numbers. So the fact that AWS hasn't seen a huge downward momentum relative to a January 2021 position is one positive in the data. And both companies are well above that magic 40% line on the Y-axis, anything above 40% we consider to be highly elevated. But the fact remains that they're down as are most of the names on this chart. So let's take a closer look. I want to start with Snowflake and Databricks. Snowflake, as we reported from several quarters back came down to Earth, it was up in the 80% range in the Y-axis here. And it's still highly elevated in the 60% range and it continues to move to the right, which is positive but as we'll address in a moment it's customers can dial down consumption just as in any cloud. Now, Databricks is really interesting. It's not a public company, it never made it to IPO during the sort of tech bubble. So we don't have the same level of transparency that we do with other companies that did make it through. But look at how much more prominent it is on the X-axis relative to January 2021. And it's net score is basically held up over that period of time. So that's a real positive for Databricks. Next, look at Workday and Salesforce. They've held up relatively well, both inching to the right and generally holding their net scores. Same from Mongo, which is the brown dot above its name that says Elastic, it says a little gets a little crowded which Elastic's actually the blue dot above it. But generally, SaaS is harder to dial down, Workday, Salesforce, Oracles, SaaS and others. So it's harder to dial down because commitments have been made in advance, they're kind of locked in. Now, one of the discussions from last summer was as Mongo, less discretionary than analytics i.e. Snowflake. And it's an interesting debate but maybe Snowflake customers, you know, they're also generally committed to a dollar amount. So over time the spending is going to be there. But in the short term, yeah maybe Snowflake customers can dial down. Now that highlighted dotted red line, that bolded one is Datadog and you can see it's made major strides on the X-axis but its net score has decelerated quite dramatically. Openshift's momentum in the survey has dropped although IBM just announced that OpenShift has a a billion dollar ARR and I suspect what's happening there is IBM consulting is bundling OpenShift into its modernization projects. It's got a, that sort of captive base if you will. And as such it's probably not as top of mind to the respondents but I'll bet you the developers are certainly aware of it. Now the other really notable call out here is CloudFlare, We've reported on them earlier. Cloudflare's net score has held up really well since January of 2021. It really hasn't seen the downdraft of some of these others, but it's making major major moves to the right gaining market presence. We really like how CloudFlare is performing. And the last comment is on Oracle which as you can see, despite its much, much lower net score continues to gain ground in the market and thrive from a profitability standpoint. But the data pretty clearly shows that there's a downdraft in the market. Okay, so what's happening here? Let's dig deeper into this data. Here's a graphic from the most recent ETR drill down asking customers that said they were going to cut spending what technique they're using to do so. Now, as we've previously reported, consolidating redundant vendors is by far the most cited approach but there's two key points we want to make here. One is reducing excess cloud resources. As you can see in the bars is the second most cited technique and it's up from the previous polling period. The second we're not showing, you know directly but we've got some red call outs there. Reducing cloud costs jumps to 29% and 28% respectively in financial services and tech telco. And it's much closer to second. It's basically neck and neck with consolidating redundant vendors in those two industries. So they're being really aggressive about optimizing cloud cost. Okay, so as we said, cloud is great 'cause you can dial it up but it's just as easy to dial down. We've identified six factors that customers tell us are affecting their cloud consumption and there are probably more, if you got more we'd love to hear them but these are the ones that are fairly prominent that have hit our radar. First, rising mortgage rates mean banks are processing fewer loans means less cloud. The crypto crash means less trading activity and that means less cloud resources. Third lower ad spend has led companies to reduce not only you know, their ad buying but also their frequency of running their analytics and their calculations. And they're also often using less data, maybe compressing the timeframe of the corpus down to a shorter time period. Also very prominent is down to the bottom left, using lower cost compute instances. For example, Graviton from AWS or AMD chips and tiering storage to cheaper S3 or deep archived tiers. And finally, optimizing based on better pricing plans. So customers are moving from, you know, smaller companies in particular moving maybe from on demand or other larger companies that are experimenting using on demand or they're moving to spot pricing or reserved instances or optimized savings plans. That all lowers cost and that means less cloud resource consumption and less cloud revenue. Now in the days when everything was on prem CFOs, what would they do? They would freeze CapEx and IT Pros would have to try to do more with less and often that meant a lot of manual tasks. With the cloud it's much easier to move things around. It still takes some thinking and some effort but it's dramatically simpler to do so. So you can get those savings a lot faster. Now of course the other huge factor is you can cut or you can freeze. And this graphic shows data from a recent ETR survey with 159 respondents and you can see the meaningful uptick in hiring freezes, freezing new IT deployments and layoffs. And as we've been reporting, this has been trending up since earlier last year. And note the call out, this is especially prominent in retail sectors, all three of these techniques jump up in retail and that's a bit of a concern because oftentimes consumer spending helps the economy make a softer landing out of a pullback. But this is a potential canary in the coal mine. If retail firms are pulling back it's because consumers aren't spending as much. And so we're keeping a close eye on that. So let's boil this down to the market data and what this all means. So in this graphic we show our estimates for Q4 IaaS revenues compared to the "actual" IaaS revenues. And we say quote because AWS is the only one that reports, you know clean revenue and IaaS, Azure and GCP don't report actuals. Why would they? Because it would make them look even, you know smaller relative to AWS. Rather, they bury the figures in overall cloud which includes their, you know G-Suite for Google and all the Microsoft SaaS. And then they give us little tidbits about in Microsoft's case, Azure, they give growth rates. Google gives kind of relative growth of GCP. So, and we use survey data and you know, other data to try to really pinpoint and we've been covering this for, I don't know, five or six years ever since the cloud really became a thing. But looking at the data, we had AWS growing at 25% this quarter and it came in at 20%. So a significant decline relative to our expectations. AWS announced that it exited December, actually, sorry it's January data showed about a 15% mid-teens growth rate. So that's, you know, something we're watching. Azure was two points off our forecast coming in at 38% growth. It said it exited December in the 35% growth range and it said that it's expecting five points of deceleration off of that. So think 30% for Azure. GCP came in three points off our expectation coming in 35% and Alibaba has yet to report but we've shaved a bid off that forecast based on some survey data and you know what maybe 9% is even still not enough. Now for the year, the big four hyperscalers generated almost 160 billion of revenue, but that was 7 billion lower than what what we expected coming into 2022. For 2023, we're expecting 21% growth for a total of 193.3 billion. And while it's, you know, lower, you know, significantly lower than historical expectations it's still four to five times the overall spending forecast that we just shared with you in our predictions post of between 4 and 5% for the overall market. We think AWS is going to come in in around 93 billion this year with Azure closing in at over 71 billion. This is, again, we're talking IaaS here. Now, despite Amazon focusing investors on the fact that AWS's absolute dollar growth is still larger than its competitors. By our estimates Azure will come in at more than 75% of AWS's forecasted revenue. That's a significant milestone. AWS is operating margins by the way declined significantly this past quarter, dropping from 30% of revenue to 24%, 30% the year earlier to 24%. Now that's still extremely healthy and we've seen wild fluctuations like this before so I don't get too freaked out about that. But I'll say this, Microsoft has a marginal cost advantage relative to AWS because one, it has a captive cloud on which to run its massive software estate. So it can just throw software at its own cloud and two software marginal costs. Marginal economics despite AWS's awesomeness in high degrees of automation, software is just a better business. Now the upshot for AWS is the ecosystem. AWS is essentially in our view positioning very smartly as a platform for data partners like Snowflake and Databricks, security partners like CrowdStrike and Okta and Palo Alto and many others and SaaS companies. You know, Microsoft is more competitive even though AWS does have competitive products. Now of course Amazon's competitive to retail companies so that's another factor but generally speaking for tech players, Amazon is a really thriving ecosystem that is a secret weapon in our view. AWS happy to spin the meter with its partners even though it sells competitive products, you know, more so in our view than other cloud players. Microsoft, of course is, don't forget is hyping now, we're hearing a lot OpenAI and ChatGPT we reported last week in our predictions post. How OpenAI is shot up in terms of market sentiment in ETR's emerging technology company surveys and people are moving to Azure to get OpenAI and get ChatGPT that is a an interesting lever. Amazon in our view has to have a response. They have lots of AI and they're going to have to make some moves there. Meanwhile, Google is emphasizing itself as an AI first company. In fact, Google spent at least five minutes of continuous dialogue, nonstop on its AI chops during its latest earnings call. So that's an area that we're watching very closely as the buzz around large language models continues. All right, let's wrap up with some assumptions for 2023. We think SaaS players are going to continue to be sticky. They're going to be somewhat insulated from all these downdrafts because they're so tied in and customers, you know they make the commitment up front, you've got the lock in. Now having said that, we do expect some backlash over time on the onerous and generally customer unfriendly pricing models of most large SaaS companies. But that's going to play out over a longer period of time. Now for cloud generally and the hyperscalers specifically we do expect accelerating growth rates into Q3 but the amplitude of the demand swings from this rubber band economy, we expect to continue to compress and become more predictable throughout the year. Estimates are coming down, CEOs we think are going to be more cautious when the market snaps back more cautious about hiring and spending and as such a perhaps we expect a more orderly return to growth which we think will slightly accelerate in Q4 as comps get easier. Now of course the big risk to these scenarios is of course the economy, the FED, consumer spending, inflation, supply chain, energy prices, wars, geopolitics, China relations, you know, all the usual stuff. But as always with our partners at ETR and the Cube community, we're here for you. We have the data and we'll be the first to report when we see a change at the margin. Okay, that's a wrap for today. I want to thank Alex Morrison who's on production and manages the podcast, Ken Schiffman as well out of our Boston studio getting this up on LinkedIn Live. Thank you for that. Kristen Martin also and Cheryl Knight help get the word out on social media and in our newsletters. And Rob Hof is our Editor-in-Chief over at siliconangle.com. He does some great editing for us. Thank you all. Remember all these episodes are available as podcast. Wherever you listen, just search Breaking Analysis podcast. I publish each week on wikibon.com, at siliconangle.com where you can see all the data and you want to get in touch. Just all you can do is email me david.vellante@siliconangle.com or DM me @dvellante if you if you got something interesting, I'll respond. If you don't, it's either 'cause I'm swamped or it's just not tickling me. You can comment on our LinkedIn post as well. And please check out ETR.ai for the best survey data in the enterprise tech business. This is Dave Vellante for the Cube Insights powered by ETR. Thanks for watching and we'll see you next time on Breaking Analysis. (gentle upbeat music)

(electronic music) >> Hi everybody, welcome back to Supercloud 2. I'm Dave Vellante with my co-host John Furrier. We're here at our tricked out Palo Alto studio. We're going live wall to wall all day. We're inserting a number of pre-recorded interviews, folks like Walmart. We just heard from Nir Zuk of Palo Alto Networks, and I'm really pleased to welcome in David Flynn. David Flynn, you may know as one of the people behind Fusion-io, completely changed the way in which people think about storing data, accessing data. David Flynn now the founder and CEO of a company called Hammerspace. David, good to see you, thanks for coming on. >> David: Good to see you too. >> And Dr. Nelu Mihai is the CEO and founder of Cloud of Clouds. He's actually built a Supercloud. We're going to get into that. Nelu, thanks for coming on. >> Thank you, Happy New Year. >> Yeah, Happy New Year. So I'm going to start right off with a little debate that's going on in the community if you guys would bring out this slide. So Bob Muglia early today, he gave a definition of Supercloud. He felt like we had to tighten ours up a little bit. He said a Supercloud is a platform, underscoring platform, that provides programmatically consistent services hosted on heterogeneous cloud providers. Now, Nelu, we have this shared doc, and you've been in there. You responded, you said, well, hold on. Supercloud really needs to be an architecture, or else we're going to have this stove pipe of stove pipes, really. And then you went on with more detail, what's the information model? What's the execution model? How are users going to interact with Supercloud? So I start with you, why architecture? The inference is that a platform, the platform provider's responsible for the architecture? Why does that not work in your view? >> No, the, it's a very interesting question. So whenever I think about platform, what's the connotation, you think about monolithic system? Yeah, I mean, I don't know whether it's true or or not, but there is this connotation of of monolithic. On the other hand, if you look at what's a problem right now with HyperClouds, from the customer perspective, they're very complex. There is a heterogeneous world where actually every single one of this HyperClouds has their own architecture. You need rocket scientists to build a cloud applications. Always there is this contradiction between cost and performance. They fight each other. And I'm quoting here a former friend of mine from Bell Labs who work at AWS who used to say "Cloud is cheap as long as you don't use it too much." (group chuckles) So clearly we need something that kind of plays from the principle point of view the role of an operating system, that seats on top of this heterogeneous HyperCloud, and there's nothing wrong by having these proprietary HyperClouds, think about processors, think about operating system and so on, so forth. But in order to build a system that is simple enough, I think we need to go deeper and understand. >> So the argument, the counterargument to that, David, is you'll never get there. You need a proprietary system to get to market sooner, to solve today's problem. Now I don't know where you stand on this platform versus architecture. I haven't asked you, but. >> I think there are aspects of both for sure. I mean it needs to be an architecture in the sense that it's broad based and open and so forth. But you know, platform, you could say as long as people can instantiate it themselves, on their own infrastructure, as long as it's something that can be deployed as, you know, software defined, you don't want the concept of platform being the monolith, you know, combined hardware and software. So it really depends on what you're focused on when you're saying platform, you know, I'd say as long as they software defined thing, to where it can literally run anywhere. I mean, because I really think what we're talking about here is the original concept of cloud computing. The ability to run anything anywhere, without having to care about the physical infrastructure. And what we have today is not that, the cloud today is a big mainframe in the sky, that just happens to be large enough that once you select which region, generally you have enough resources. But, you know, nowadays you don't even necessarily have enough resources in one region. and then you're kind of stuck. So we haven't really gotten to that utility model of computing. And you're also asked to rewrite your application, you know, to abandon the conveniences of high performance file access. You got to rewrite it to use object storage stuff. We have to get away from that. >> Okay, I want to just drill on that, 'cause I think I like that point about, there's not enough availability, but on the developer cloud, the original AWS premise was targeting developers, 'cause at that time, you have to provision a Sun box get a Cisco DSU/CSU, now you get on the cloud. But I think you're giving up the scale question, 'cause I think right now, scale is huge, enterprise grade versus cloud for developers. >> That's Right. >> Because I mean look at, Amazon, Azure, they got compute, they got storage, they got queuing, and some stuff. If you're doing a startup, you throw your app up there, localhost to cloud, no big deal. It's the scale thing that gets me- >> And you can tell by the fact that, in regions that are under high demand, right, like in London or LA, at least with the clients we work with in the median entertainment space, it costs twice as much for the exact same cloud instances that do the exact same amount of work, as somewhere out in rural Canada. So why is it you have such a cost differential, it has to do with that supply and demand, and the fact that the clouds aren't really the ability to run anything anywhere. Even within the same cloud vendor, you're stuck in a specific region. >> And that was never the original promise, right? I mean it was, we turned it into that. But the original promise was get rid of the heavy lifting of IT. >> Not have to run your own, yeah, exactly. >> And then it became, wow, okay I can run anywhere. And then you know, it's like web 2.0. You know people say why Supercloud, you and I talked about this, why do you need a name for Supercloud? It's like web 2.0. >> It's what Cloud was supposed to be. >> It's what cloud was supposed to be, (group laughing and talking) exactly, right. >> Cloud was supposed to be run anything anywhere, or at least that's what we took it as. But you're right, originally it was just, oh don't have to run your own infrastructure, and you can choose somebody else's infrastructure. >> And you did that >> But you're still bound to that. >> Dave: And People said I want more, right? >> But how do we go from here? >> That's, that's actually, that's a very good point, because indeed when the first HyperClouds were designed, were designed really focus on customers. I think Supercloud is an opportunity to design in the right way. Also having in mind the computer science rigor. And we should take advantage of that, because in fact actually, if cloud would've been designed properly from the beginning, probably wouldn't have needed Supercloud. >> David: You wouldn't have to have been asked to rewrite your application. >> That's correct. (group laughs) >> To use REST interfaces to your storage. >> Revisist history is always a good one. But look, cloud is great. I mean your point is cloud is a good thing. Don't hold it back. >> It is a very good thing. >> Let it continue. >> Let it go as as it is. >> Yeah, let that thing continue to grow. Don't impose restrictions on the cloud. Just refactor what you need to for scale or enterprise grade or availability. >> And you would agree with that, is that true or is it problem you're solving? >> Well yeah, I mean it, what the cloud is doing is absolutely necessary. What the public cloud vendors are doing is absolutely necessary. But what's been missing is how to provide a consistent interface, especially to persistent data. And have it be available across different regions, and across different clouds. 'cause data is a highly localized thing in current architecture. It only exists as rendered by the storage system that you put it in. Whether that's a legacy thing like a NetApp or an Isilon or even a cloud data service. It's localized to a specific region of the cloud in which you put that. We have to delocalize data, and provide a consistent interface to it across all sites. That's high performance, local access, but to global data. >> And so Walmart earlier today described their, what we call Supercloud, they call it the Walmart cloud native platform. And they use this triplet model. They have AWS and Azure, no, oh sorry, no AWS. They have Azure and GCP and then on-prem, where all the VMs live. When you, you know, probe, it turns out that it's only stateless in the cloud. (John laughs) So, the state stuff- >> Well let's just admit it, there is no such thing as stateless, because even the application binaries and libraries are state. >> Well I'm happy that I'm hearing that. >> Yeah, okay. >> Because actually I have a lot of debate (indistinct). If you think about no software running on a (indistinct) machine is stateless. >> David: Exactly. >> This is something that was- >> David: And that's data that needs to be distributed and provided consistently >> (indistinct) >> Across all the clouds, >> And actually, it's a nonsense, but- >> Dave: So it's an illusion, okay. (group talks over each other) >> (indistinct) you guys talk about stateless. >> Well, see, people make the confusion between state and persistent state, okay. Persistent state it's a different thing. State is a different thing. So, but anyway, I want to go back to your point, because there's a lot of debate here. People are talking about data, some people are talking about logic, some people are talking about networking. In my opinion is this triplet, which is data logic and connectivity, that has equal importance. And actually depending on the application, can have the center of gravity moving towards data, moving towards what I call execution units or workloads. And connectivity is actually the most important part of it. >> David: (indistinct). >> Some people are saying move the logic towards the data, some other people, and you are saying actually, that no, you have to build a distributed data mesh. What I'm saying is actually, you have to consider all these three variables, all these vector in order to decide, based on application, what's the most important. Because sometimes- >> John: So the application chooses >> That's correct. >> Well it it's what operating systems were in the past, was principally the thing that runs and manages the jobs, the job scheduler, and the thing that provides your persistent data (indistinct). >> Okay. So we finally got operating system into the equation, thank you. (group laughs) >> Nelu: I actually have a PhD in operating system. >> Cause what we're talking about is an operating system. So forget platform or architecture, it's an operating environment. Let's use it as a general term. >> All right. I think that's about it for me. >> All right, let's take (indistinct). Nelu, I want ask you quick, 'cause I want to give a, 'cause I believe it's an operating system. I think it's going to be a reset, refactored. You wrote to me, "The model of Supercloud has to be open theoretical, has to satisfy the rigors of computer science, and customer requirements." So unique to today, if the OS is going to be refactored, it's not going to be, may or may not be Red Hat or somebody else. This new OS, obviously requirements are for customers too but is what's the computer science that is needed? Where are we, what's the missing? Where's the science in this shift? It's not your standard OS it's not like an- (group talks over each other) >> I would beg to differ. >> (indistinct) truly an operation environment. But the, if you think about, and make analogies, what you need when you design a distributed system, well you need an information model, yeah. You need to figure out how the data is located and distributed. You need a model for the execution units, and you need a way to describe the interactions between all these objects. And it is my opinion that we need to go deeper and formalize these operations in order to make a step forward. And when we design Supercloud, and design something that is better than the current HyperClouds. And actually that is when we design something better, you make a system more efficient and it's going to be better from the cost point of view, from the performance point of view. But we need to add some math into all this customer focus centering and I really admire AWS and their executive team focusing on the customer. But now it's time to go back and see, if we apply some computer science, if you try to formalize to build a theoretical model of cloud, can we build a system that is better than existing ones? >> So David, how do you- >> this is what I'm saying. >> That's a good question >> How do You see the operating system of a, or operating environment of a decentralized cloud? >> Well I think it's layered. I mean we have operating systems that can run systems quite efficiently. Linux has sort of one in the data center, but we're talking about a layer on top of that. And I think we're seeing the emergence of that. For example, on the job scheduling side of things, Kubernetes makes a really good example. You know, you break the workload into the most granular units of compute, the containerized microservice, and then you use a declarative model to state what is needed and give the system the degrees of freedom that it can choose how to instantiate it. Because the thing about these distributed systems, is that the complexity explodes, right? Running a piece of hardware, running a single server is not a problem, even with all the many cores and everything like that. It's when you start adding in the networking, and making it so that you have many of them. And then when it's going across whole different data centers, you know, so, at that level the way you solve this is not manually (group laughs) and not procedurally. You have to change the language so it's intent based, it's a declarative model, and what you're stating is what is intended, and you're leaving it to more advanced techniques, like machine learning to decide how to instantiate that service across the cluster, which is what Kubernetes does, or how to instantiate the data across the diverse storage infrastructure. And that's what we do. >> So that's a very good point because actually what has been neglected with HyperClouds is really optimization and automation. But in order to be able to do both of these things, you need, I'm going back and I'm stubborn, you need to have a mathematical model, a theoretical model because what does automation mean? It means that we have to put machines to do the work instead of us, and machines work with what? Formula, with algorithms, they don't work with services. So I think Supercloud is an opportunity to underscore the importance of optimization and automation- >> Totally agree. >> In HyperCloud, and actually by doing that, we can also have an interesting connotation. We are also contributing to save our planet, because if you think right now. we're consuming a lot of energy on this HyperClouds and also all this AI applications, and I think we can do better and build the same kind of application using less energy. >> So yeah, great point, love that call out, the- you know, Dave and I always joke about the old, 'cause we're old, we talk about, you know, (Nelu Laughs) old history, OS/2 versus DOS, okay, OS's, OS/2 is silly better, first threaded OS, DOS never went away. So how does legacy play into this conversation? Because I buy the theoretical, I love the conversation. Okay, I think it's an OS, totally see it that way myself. What's the blocker? Is there a legacy that drags it back? Is the anchor dragging from legacy? Is there a DOS OS/2 moment? Is there an opportunity to flip the script? This is- >> I think that's a perfect example of why we need to support the existing interfaces, Operating Systems, real operating systems like Linux, understands how to present data, it's called a file system, block devices, things that that plumb in there. And by, you know, going to a REST interface and S3 and telling people they have to rewrite their applications, you can't even consume your application binaries that way, the OS doesn't know how to pull that sort of thing. So we, to get to cloud, to get to the ability to host massive numbers of tenants within a centralized infrastructure, you know, we abandoned these lower level interfaces to the OS and we have to go back to that. It's the reason why DOS ultimately won, is it had the momentum of the install base. We're seeing the same thing here. Whatever it is, it has to be a real file system and not a come down file system >> Nelu, what's your reaction, 'cause you're in the theoretical bandwagon. Let's get your reaction. >> No, I think it's a good, I'll give, you made a good analogy between OS/2 and DOS, but I'll go even farther saying, if you think about the evolution operating system didn't stop the evolution of underlying microprocessors, hardware, and so on and so forth. On the contrary, it was a catalyst for that. So because everybody could develop their own hardware, without worrying that the applications on top of operating system are going to modify. The same thing is going to happen with Supercloud. You're going to have the AWSs, you're going to have the Azure and the the GCP continue to evolve in their own way proprietary. But if we create on top of it the right interface >> The open, this is why open is important. >> That's correct, because actually you're going to see sometime ago, everybody was saying, remember venture capitals were saying, "AWS killed the world, nobody's going to come." Now you see what Oracle is doing, and then you're going to see other players. >> It's funny, Amazon's trying to be more like Microsoft. Microsoft's trying to be more like Amazon and Google- Oracle's just trying to say they have cloud. >> That's, that's correct, (group laughs) so, my point is, you're going to see a multiplication of this HyperClouds and cloud technology. So, the system has to be open in order to accommodate what it is and what is going to come. Okay, so it's open. >> So the the legacy- so legacy is an opportunity, not a blocker in your mind. And you see- >> That's correct, I think we should allow them to continue to to to be their own actually. But maybe you're going to find a way to connect with it. >> Amazon's the processor, and they're on the 80 80 80 right? >> That's correct. >> You're saying you love people trying to get put to work. >> That's a good analogy. >> But, performance levels you say good luck, right? >> Well yeah, we have to be able to take traditional applications, high performance applications, those that consume file system and persistent data. Those things have to be able to run anywhere. You need to be able to put, put them onto, you know, more elastic infrastructure. So, we have to actually get cloud to where it lives up to its billing. >> And that's what you're solving for, with Hammerspace, >> That's what we're solving for, making it possible- >> Give me the bumper sticker. >> Solving for how do you have massive quantities of unstructured file data? At the end of the day, all data ultimately is unstructured data. Have that persistent data available, across any data center, within any cloud, within any region on-prem, at the edge. And have not just the same APIs, but have the exact same data sets, and not sucked over a straw remote, but at extreme high performance, local access. So how do you have local access to globally shared distributed data? And that's what we're doing. We are orchestrating data globally across all different forms of storage infrastructure, so you have a consistent access at the highest performance levels, at the lowest level innate built into the OS, how to consume it as (indistinct) >> So are you going into the- all the clouds and natively building in there, or are you off cloud? >> So This is software that can run on cloud instances and provide high performance file within the cloud. It can take file data that's on-prem. Again, it's software, it can run in virtual or on physical servers. And it abstracts the data from the existing storage infrastructure, and makes the data visible and consumable and orchestratable across any of it. >> And what's the elevator pitch for Cloud of Cloud, give that too. >> Well, Cloud of Clouds creates a theoretical model of cloud, and it describes every single object in the cloud. Where is data, execution units, and connectivity, with one single class of very simple object. And I can, I can give you (indistinct) >> And the problem that solves is what? >> The problem that solves is, it creates this mathematical model that is necessary in order to do other interesting things, such as optimization, using sata engines, using automation, applying ML for instance. Or deep learning to automate all this clouds, if you think about in the industrial field, we know how to manage and automate huge plants. Why wouldn't it do the same thing in cloud? It's the same thing you- >> That's what you mean by theoretical model. >> Nelu: That's correct. >> Lay out the architecture, almost the bones of skeleton or something, or, and then- >> That's correct, and then on top of it you can actually build a platform, You can create your services, >> when you say math, you mean you put numbers to it, you kind of index it. >> You quantify this thing and you apply mathematical- It's really about, I can disclose this thing. It's really about describing the cloud as a knowledge graph for every single object in the graph for node, an edge is a vector. And then once you have this model, then you can apply the field theory, and linear algebra to do operation with these vectors. And it's, this creates a very interesting opportunity to let the math do this thing for us. >> Okay, so what happens with hyperscale, or it's like AWS in your model. >> So in, in my model actually, >> Are they happy with this, or they >> I'm very happy with that. >> Will they be happy with you? >> We create an interface to every single HyperCloud. We actually, we don't need to interface with the thousands of APIs, but you know, if we have the 80 20 rule, and we map these APIs into this graph, and then every single operation that is done in this graph is done from the beginning, in an optimized manner and also automation ready. >> That's going to be great. David, I want us to go back to you before we close real quick. You've had a lot of experience, multiple ventures on the front end. You talked to a lot of customers who've been innovating. Where are the classic (indistinct)? Cause you, you used to sell and invent product around the old school enterprises with storage, you know that that trajectory storage is still critical to store the data. Where's the classic enterprise grade mindset right now? Those customers that were buying, that are buying storage, they're in the cloud, they're lifting and shifting. They not yet put the throttle on DevOps. When they look at this Supercloud thing, Are they like a deer in the headlights, or are they like getting it? What's the, what's the classic enterprise look like? >> You're seeing people at different stages of adoption. Some folks are trying to get to the cloud, some folks are trying to repatriate from the cloud, because they've realized it's better to own than to rent when you use a lot of it. And so people are at very different stages of the journey. But the one thing that's constant is that there's always change. And the change here has to do with being able to change the location where you're doing your computing. So being able to support traditional workloads in the cloud, being able to run things at the edge, and being able to rationalize where the data ought to exist, and with a declarative model, intent-based, business objective-based, be able to swipe a mouse and have the data get redistributed and positioned across different vendors, across different clouds, that, we're seeing that as really top of mind right now, because everybody's at some point on this journey, trying to go somewhere, and it involves taking their data with them. (John laughs) >> Guys, great conversation. Thanks so much for coming on, for John, Dave. Stay tuned, we got a great analyst power panel coming right up. More from Palo Alto, Supercloud 2. Be right back. (bouncy music)

>> Welcome back to SuperCloud2. This is Dave Vellante, and we're here with Jack Greenfield. He's the Vice President of Enterprise Architecture and the Chief Architect for the global technology platform at Walmart. Jack, I want to thank you for coming on the program. Really appreciate your time. >> Glad to be here, Dave. Thanks for inviting me and appreciate the opportunity to chat with you. >> Yeah, it's our pleasure. Now we call what you've built a SuperCloud. That's our term, not yours, but how would you describe the Walmart Cloud Native Platform? >> So WCNP, as the acronym goes, is essentially an implementation of Kubernetes for the Walmart ecosystem. And what that means is that we've taken Kubernetes off the shelf as open source, and we have integrated it with a number of foundational services that provide other aspects of our computational environment. So Kubernetes off the shelf doesn't do everything. It does a lot. In particular the orchestration of containers, but it delegates through API a lot of key functions. So for example, secret management, traffic management, there's a need for telemetry and observability at a scale beyond what you get from raw Kubernetes. That is to say, harvesting the metrics that are coming out of Kubernetes and processing them, storing them in time series databases, dashboarding them, and so on. There's also an angle to Kubernetes that gets a lot of attention in the daily DevOps routine, that's not really part of the open source deliverable itself, and that is the DevOps sort of CICD pipeline-oriented lifecycle. And that is something else that we've added and integrated nicely. And then one more piece of this picture is that within a Kubernetes cluster, there's a function that is critical to allowing services to discover each other and integrate with each other securely and with proper configuration provided by the concept of a service mesh. So Istio, Linkerd, these are examples of service mesh technologies. And we have gone ahead and integrated actually those two. There's more than those two, but we've integrated those two with Kubernetes. So the net effect is that when a developer within Walmart is going to build an application, they don't have to think about all those other capabilities where they come from or how they're provided. Those are already present, and the way the CICD pipelines are set up, it's already sort of in the picture, and there are configuration points that they can take advantage of in the primary YAML and a couple of other pieces of config that we supply where they can tune it. But at the end of the day, it offloads an awful lot of work for them, having to stand up and operate those services, fail them over properly, and make them robust. All of that's provided for. >> Yeah, you know, developers often complain they spend too much time wrangling and doing things that aren't productive. So I wonder if you could talk about the high level business goals of the initiative in terms of the hardcore benefits. Was the real impetus to tap into best of breed cloud services? Were you trying to cut costs? Maybe gain negotiating leverage with the cloud guys? Resiliency, you know, I know was a major theme. Maybe you could give us a sense of kind of the anatomy of the decision making process that went in. >> Sure, and in the course of answering your question, I think I'm going to introduce the concept of our triplet architecture which we haven't yet touched on in the interview here. First off, just to sort of wrap up the motivation for WCNP itself which is kind of orthogonal to the triplet architecture. It can exist with or without it. Currently does exist with it, which is key, and I'll get to that in a moment. The key drivers, business drivers for WCNP were developer productivity by offloading the kinds of concerns that we've just discussed. Number two, improving resiliency, that is to say reducing opportunity for human error. One of the challenges you tend to run into in a large enterprise is what we call snowflakes, lots of gratuitously different workloads, projects, configurations to the extent that by developing and using WCNP and continuing to evolve it as we have, we end up with cookie cutter like consistency across our workloads which is super valuable when it comes to building tools or building services to automate operations that would otherwise be manual. When everything is pretty much done the same way, that becomes much simpler. Another key motivation for WCNP was the ability to abstract from the underlying cloud provider. And this is going to lead to a discussion of our triplet architecture. At the end of the day, when one works directly with an underlying cloud provider, one ends up taking a lot of dependencies on that particular cloud provider. Those dependencies can be valuable. For example, there are best of breed services like say Cloud Spanner offered by Google or say Cosmos DB offered by Microsoft that one wants to use and one is willing to take the dependency on the cloud provider to get that functionality because it's unique and valuable. On the other hand, one doesn't want to take dependencies on a cloud provider that don't add a lot of value. And with Kubernetes, we have the opportunity, and this is a large part of how Kubernetes was designed and why it is the way it is, we have the opportunity to sort of abstract from the underlying cloud provider for stateless workloads on compute. And so what this lets us do is build container-based applications that can run without change on different cloud provider infrastructure. So the same applications can run on WCNP over Azure, WCNP over GCP, or WCNP over the Walmart private cloud. And we have a private cloud. Our private cloud is OpenStack based and it gives us some significant cost advantages as well as control advantages. So to your point, in terms of business motivation, there's a key cost driver here, which is that we can use our own private cloud when it's advantageous and then use the public cloud provider capabilities when we need to. A key place with this comes into play is with elasticity. So while the private cloud is much more cost effective for us to run and use, it isn't as elastic as what the cloud providers offer, right? We don't have essentially unlimited scale. We have large scale, but the public cloud providers are elastic in the extreme which is a very powerful capability. So what we're able to do is burst, and we use this term bursting workloads into the public cloud from the private cloud to take advantage of the elasticity they offer and then fall back into the private cloud when the traffic load diminishes to the point where we don't need that elastic capability, elastic capacity at low cost. And this is a very important paradigm that I think is going to be very commonplace ultimately as the industry evolves. Private cloud is easier to operate and less expensive, and yet the public cloud provider capabilities are difficult to match. >> And the triplet, the tri is your on-prem private cloud and the two public clouds that you mentioned, is that right? >> That is correct. And we actually have an architecture in which we operate all three of those cloud platforms in close proximity with one another in three different major regions in the US. So we have east, west, and central. And in each of those regions, we have all three cloud providers. And the way it's configured, those data centers are within 10 milliseconds of each other, meaning that it's of negligible cost to interact between them. And this allows us to be fairly agnostic to where a particular workload is running. >> Does a human make that decision, Jack or is there some intelligence in the system that determines that? >> That's a really great question, Dave. And it's a great question because we're at the cusp of that transition. So currently humans make that decision. Humans choose to deploy workloads into a particular region and a particular provider within that region. That said, we're actively developing patterns and practices that will allow us to automate the placement of the workloads for a variety of criteria. For example, if in a particular region, a particular provider is heavily overloaded and is unable to provide the level of service that's expected through our SLAs, we could choose to fail workloads over from that cloud provider to a different one within the same region. But that's manual today. We do that, but people do it. Okay, we'd like to get to where that happens automatically. In the same way, we'd like to be able to automate the failovers, both for high availability and sort of the heavier disaster recovery model between, within a region between providers and even within a provider between the availability zones that are there, but also between regions for the sort of heavier disaster recovery or maintenance driven realignment of workload placement. Today, that's all manual. So we have people moving workloads from region A to region B or data center A to data center B. It's clean because of the abstraction. The workloads don't have to know or care, but there are latency considerations that come into play, and the humans have to be cognizant of those. And automating that can help ensure that we get the best performance and the best reliability. >> But you're developing the dataset to actually, I would imagine, be able to make those decisions in an automated fashion over time anyway. Is that a fair assumption? >> It is, and that's what we're actively developing right now. So if you were to look at us today, we have these nice abstractions and APIs in place, but people run that machine, if you will, moving toward a world where that machine is fully automated. >> What exactly are you abstracting? Is it sort of the deployment model or, you know, are you able to abstract, I'm just making this up like Azure functions and GCP functions so that you can sort of run them, you know, with a consistent experience. What exactly are you abstracting and how difficult was it to achieve that objective technically? >> that's a good question. What we're abstracting is the Kubernetes node construct. That is to say a cluster of Kubernetes nodes which are typically VMs, although they can run bare metal in certain contexts, is something that typically to stand up requires knowledge of the underlying cloud provider. So for example, with GCP, you would use GKE to set up a Kubernetes cluster, and in Azure, you'd use AKS. We are actually abstracting that aspect of things so that the developers standing up applications don't have to know what the underlying cluster management provider is. They don't have to know if it's GCP, AKS or our own Walmart private cloud. Now, in terms of functions like Azure functions that you've mentioned there, we haven't done that yet. That's another piece that we have sort of on our radar screen that, we'd like to get to is serverless approach, and the Knative work from Google and the Azure functions, those are things that we see good opportunity to use for a whole variety of use cases. But right now we're not doing much with that. We're strictly container based right now, and we do have some VMs that are running in sort of more of a traditional model. So our stateful workloads are primarily VM based, but for serverless, that's an opportunity for us to take some of these stateless workloads and turn them into cloud functions. >> Well, and that's another cost lever that you can pull down the road that's going to drop right to the bottom line. Do you see a day or maybe you're doing it today, but I'd be surprised, but where you build applications that actually span multiple clouds or is there, in your view, always going to be a direct one-to-one mapping between where an application runs and the specific cloud platform? >> That's a really great question. Well, yes and no. So today, application development teams choose a cloud provider to deploy to and a location to deploy to, and they have to get involved in moving an application like we talked about today. That said, the bursting capability that I mentioned previously is something that is a step in the direction of automatic migration. That is to say we're migrating workload to different locations automatically. Currently, the prototypes we've been developing and that we think are going to eventually make their way into production are leveraging Istio to assess the load incoming on a particular cluster and start shedding that load into a different location. Right now, the configuration of that is still manual, but there's another opportunity for automation there. And I think a key piece of this is that down the road, well, that's a, sort of a small step in the direction of an application being multi provider. We expect to see really an abstraction of the fact that there is a triplet even. So the workloads are moving around according to whatever the control plane decides is necessary based on a whole variety of inputs. And at that point, you will have true multi-cloud applications, applications that are distributed across the different providers and in a way that application developers don't have to think about. >> So Walmart's been a leader, Jack, in using data for competitive advantages for decades. It's kind of been a poster child for that. You've got a mountain of IP in the form of data, tools, applications best practices that until the cloud came out was all On Prem. But I'm really interested in this idea of building a Walmart ecosystem, which obviously you have. Do you see a day or maybe you're even doing it today where you take what we call the Walmart SuperCloud, WCNP in your words, and point or turn that toward an external world or your ecosystem, you know, supporting those partners or customers that could drive new revenue streams, you know directly from the platform? >> Great question, Steve. So there's really two things to say here. The first is that with respect to data, our data workloads are primarily VM basis. I've mentioned before some VMware, some straight open stack. But the key here is that WCNP and Kubernetes are very powerful for stateless workloads, but for stateful workloads tend to be still climbing a bit of a growth curve in the industry. So our data workloads are not primarily based on WCNP. They're VM based. Now that said, there is opportunity to make some progress there, and we are looking at ways to move things into containers that are currently running in VMs which are stateful. The other question you asked is related to how we expose data to third parties and also functionality. Right now we do have in-house, for our own use, a very robust data architecture, and we have followed the sort of domain-oriented data architecture guidance from Martin Fowler. And we have data lakes in which we collect data from all the transactional systems and which we can then use and do use to build models which are then used in our applications. But right now we're not exposing the data directly to customers as a product. That's an interesting direction that's been talked about and may happen at some point, but right now that's internal. What we are exposing to customers is applications. So we're offering our global integrated fulfillment capabilities, our order picking and curbside pickup capabilities, and our cloud powered checkout capabilities to third parties. And this means we're standing up our own internal applications as externally facing SaaS applications which can serve our partners' customers. >> Yeah, of course, Martin Fowler really first introduced to the world Zhamak Dehghani's data mesh concept and this whole idea of data products and domain oriented thinking. Zhamak Dehghani, by the way, is a speaker at our event as well. Last question I had is edge, and how you think about the edge? You know, the stores are an edge. Are you putting resources there that sort of mirror this this triplet model? Or is it better to consolidate things in the cloud? I know there are trade-offs in terms of latency. How are you thinking about that? >> All really good questions. It's a challenging area as you can imagine because edges are subject to disconnection, right? Or reduced connection. So we do place the same architecture at the edge. So WCNP runs at the edge, and an application that's designed to run at WCNP can run at the edge. That said, there are a number of very specific considerations that come up when running at the edge, such as the possibility of disconnection or degraded connectivity. And so one of the challenges we have faced and have grappled with and done a good job of I think is dealing with the fact that applications go offline and come back online and have to reconnect and resynchronize, the sort of online offline capability is something that can be quite challenging. And we have a couple of application architectures that sort of form the two core sets of patterns that we use. One is an offline/online synchronization architecture where we discover that we've come back online, and we understand the differences between the online dataset and the offline dataset and how they have to be reconciled. The other is a message-based architecture. And here in our health and wellness domain, we've developed applications that are queue based. So they're essentially business processes that consist of multiple steps where each step has its own queue. And what that allows us to do is devote whatever bandwidth we do have to those pieces of the process that are most latency sensitive and allow the queue lengths to increase in parts of the process that are not latency sensitive, knowing that they will eventually catch up when the bandwidth is restored. And to put that in a little bit of context, we have fiber lengths to all of our locations, and we have I'll just use a round number, 10-ish thousand locations. It's larger than that, but that's the ballpark, and we have fiber to all of them, but when the fiber is disconnected, and it does get disconnected on a regular basis. In fact, I forget the exact number, but some several dozen locations get disconnected daily just by virtue of the fact that there's construction going on and things are happening in the real world. When the disconnection happens, we're able to fall back to 5G and to Starlink. Starlink is preferred. It's a higher bandwidth. 5G if that fails. But in each of those cases, the bandwidth drops significantly. And so the applications have to be intelligent about throttling back the traffic that isn't essential, so that it can push the essential traffic in those lower bandwidth scenarios. >> So much technology to support this amazing business which started in the early 1960s. Jack, unfortunately, we're out of time. I would love to have you back or some members of your team and drill into how you're using open source, but really thank you so much for explaining the approach that you've taken and participating in SuperCloud2. >> You're very welcome, Dave, and we're happy to come back and talk about other aspects of what we do. For example, we could talk more about the data lakes and the data mesh that we have in place. We could talk more about the directions we might go with serverless. So please look us up again. Happy to chat. >> I'm going to take you up on that, Jack. All right. This is Dave Vellante for John Furrier and the Cube community. Keep it right there for more action from SuperCloud2. (upbeat music)

>> From theCUBE Studios in Palo Alto and Boston, bringing you data-driven insights from theCUBE and ETR. This is "Breaking Analysis" with Dave Vellante. >> Recent conversations with IT decision makers show a stark contrast between exiting 2023 versus the mindset when we were leaving 2022. CIOs are generally funding new initiatives by pushing off or cutting lower priority items, while security efforts are still being funded. Those that enable business initiatives that generate revenue or taking priority over cleaning up legacy technical debt. The bottom line is, for the moment, at least, the mindset is not cut everything, rather, it's put a pause on cleaning up legacy hairballs and fund monetization. Hello, and welcome to this week's Wikibon Cube Insights powered by ETR. In this breaking analysis, we tap recent discussions from two primary sources, year-end ETR roundtables with IT decision makers, and CUBE conversations with data, cloud, and IT architecture practitioners. The sources of data for this breaking analysis come from the following areas. Eric Bradley's recent ETR year end panel featured a financial services DevOps and SRE manager, a CSO in a large hospitality firm, a director of IT for a big tech company, the head of IT infrastructure for a financial firm, and a CTO for global travel enterprise, and for our upcoming Supercloud2 conference on January 17th, which you can register free by the way, at supercloud.world, we've had CUBE conversations with data and cloud practitioners, specifically, heads of data in retail and financial services, a cloud architect and a biotech firm, the director of cloud and data at a large media firm, and the director of engineering at a financial services company. Now we've curated commentary from these sources and now we share them with you today as anecdotal evidence supporting what we've been reporting on in the marketplace for these last couple of quarters. On this program, we've likened the economy to the slingshot effect when you're driving, when you're cruising along at full speed on the highway, and suddenly you see red brake lights up ahead, so, you tap your own brakes and then you speed up again, and traffic is moving along at full speed, so, you think nothing of it, and then, all of a sudden, the same thing happens. You slow down to a crawl and you start wondering, "What the heck is happening?" And you become a lot more cautious about the rate of acceleration when you start moving again. Well, that's the trend in IT spend right now. Back in June, we reported that despite the macro headwinds, CIOs were still expecting 6% to 7% spending growth for 2022. Now that was down from 8%, which we reported at the beginning of 2022. That was before Ukraine, and Fed tightening, but given those two factors, you know that that seemed pretty robust, but throughout the fall, we began reporting consistently declining expectations where CIOs are now saying Q4 will come in at around 3% growth relative to last year, and they're expecting, or should we say hoping that it pops back up in 2023 to 4% to 5%. The recent ETR panelists, when they heard this, are saying based on their businesses and discussions with their peers, they could see low single digit growth for 2023, so, 1%, 2%, 3%, so, this sort of slingshotting, or sometimes we call it a seesaw economy, has caught everyone off guard. Amazon is a good example of this, and there are others, but Amazon entered the pandemic with around 800,000 employees. It doubled that workforce during the pandemic. Now, right before Thanksgiving in 2022, Amazon announced that it was laying off 10,000 employees, and, Jassy, the CEO of Amazon, just last week announced that number is now going to grow to 18,000. Now look, this is a rounding error at Amazon from a headcount standpoint and their headcount remains far above 2019 levels. Its stock price, however, does not and it's back down to 2019 levels. The point is that visibility is very poor right now and it's reflected in that uncertainty. We've seen a lot of layoffs, obviously, the stock market's choppy, et cetera. Now importantly, not everything is on hold, and this downturn is different from previous tech pullbacks in that the speed at which new initiatives can be rolled out is much greater thanks to the cloud, and if you can show a fast return, you're going to get funding. Organizations are pausing on the cleanup of technical debt, unless it's driving fast business value. They're holding off on modernization projects. Those business enablement initiatives are still getting funded. CIOs are finding the money by consolidating redundant vendors, and they're stealing from other pockets of budget, so, it's not surprising that cybersecurity remains the number one technology priority in 2023. We've been reporting that for quite some time now. It's specifically cloud, cloud native security container and API security. That's where all the action is, because there's still holes to plug from that forced march to digital that occurred during COVID. Cloud migration, kind of showing here on number two on this chart, still a high priority, while optimizing cloud spend is definitely a strategy that organizations are taking to cut costs. It's behind consolidating redundant vendors by a long shot. There's very little evidence that cloud repatriation, i.e., moving workloads back on prem is a major cost cutting trend. The data just doesn't show it. What is a trend is getting more real time with analytics, so, companies can do faster and more accurate customer targeting, and they're really prioritizing that, obviously, in this down economy. Real time, we sometimes lose it, what's real time? Real time, we sometimes define as before you lose the customer. Now in the hiring front, customers tell us they're still having a hard time finding qualified site reliability engineers, SREs, Kubernetes expertise, and deep analytics pros. These job markets remain very tight. Let's stay with security for just a moment. We said many times that, prior to COVID, zero trust was this undefined buzzword, and the joke, of course, is, if you ask three people, "What is zero trust?" You're going to get three different answers, but the truth is that virtually every security company that was resisting taking a position on zero trust in an attempt to avoid... They didn't want to get caught up in the buzzword vortex, but they're now really being forced to go there by CISOs, so, there are some good quotes here on cyber that we want to share that came out of the recent conversations that we cited up front. The first one, "Zero trust is the highest ROI, because it enables business transformation." In other words, if I can have good security, I can move fast, it's not a blocker anymore. Second quote here, "ZTA," zero trust architecture, "Is more than securing the perimeter. It encompasses strong authentication and multiple identity layers. It requires taking a software approach to security instead of a hardware focus." The next one, "I'd love to have a security data lake that I could apply to asset management, vulnerability management, incident management, incident response, and all aspects for my security team. I see huge promise in that space," and the last one, I see NLP, natural language processing, as the foundation for email security, so, instead of searching for IP addresses, you can now read emails at light speed and identify phishing threats, so, look at, this is a small snapshot of the mindset around security, but I'll add, when you talk to the likes of CrowdStrike, and Zscaler, and Okta, and Palo Alto Networks, and many other security firms, they're listening to these narratives around zero trust. I'm confident they're working hard on skating to this puck, if you will. A good example is this idea of a security data lake and using analytics to improve security. We're hearing a lot about that. We're hearing architectures, there's acquisitions in that regard, and so, that's becoming real, and there are many other examples, because data is at the heart of digital business. This is the next area that we want to talk about. It's obvious that data, as a topic, gets a lot of mind share amongst practitioners, but getting data right is still really hard. It's a challenge for most organizations to get ROI and expected return out of data. Most companies still put data at the periphery of their businesses. It's not at the core. Data lives within silos or different business units, different clouds, it's on-prem, and increasingly it's at the edge, and it seems like the problem is getting worse before it gets better, so, here are some instructive comments from our recent conversations. The first one, "We're publishing events onto Kafka, having those events be processed by Dataproc." Dataproc is a Google managed service to run Hadoop, and Spark, and Flank, and Presto, and a bunch of other open source tools. We're putting them into the appropriate storage models within Google, and then normalize the data into BigQuery, and only then can you take advantage of tools like ThoughtSpot, so, here's a company like ThoughtSpot, and they're all about simplifying data, democratizing data, but to get there, you have to go through some pretty complex processes, so, this is a good example. All right, another comment. "In order to use Google's AI tools, we have to put the data into BigQuery. They haven't integrated in the way AWS and Snowflake have with SageMaker. Moving the data is too expensive, time consuming, and risky," so, I'll just say this, sharing data is a killer super cloud use case, and firms like Snowflake are on top of it, but it's still not pretty across clouds, and Google's posture seems to be, "We're going to let our database product competitiveness drive the strategy first, and the ecosystem is going to take a backseat." Now, in a way, I get it, owning the database is critical, and Google doesn't want to capitulate on that front. Look, BigQuery is really good and competitive, but you can't help but roll your eyes when a CEO stands up, and look, I'm not calling out Thomas Kurian, every CEO does this, and talks about how important their customers are, and they'll do whatever is right by the customer, so, look, I'm telling you, I'm rolling my eyes on that. Now let me also comment, AWS has figured this out. They're killing it in database. If you take Redshift for example, it's still growing, as is Aurora, really fast growing services and other data stores, but AWS realizes it can make more money in the long-term partnering with the Snowflakes and Databricks of the world, and other ecosystem vendors versus sub optimizing their relationships with partners and customers in order to sell more of their own homegrown tools. I get it. It's hard not to feature your own product. IBM chose OS/2 over Windows, and tried for years to popularize it. It failed. Lotus, go back way back to Lotus 1, 2, and 3, they refused to run on Windows when it first came out. They were running on DEC VAX. Many of you young people in the United States have never even heard of DEC VAX. IBM wanted to run every everything only in its cloud, the same with Oracle, originally. VMware, as you might recall, tried to build its own cloud, but, eventually, when the market speaks and reveals what seems to be obvious to analysts, years before, the vendors come around, they face reality, and they stop wasting money, fighting a losing battle. "The trend is your friend," as the saying goes. All right, last pull quote on data, "The hardest part is transformations, moving traditional Informatica, Teradata, or Oracle infrastructure to something more modern and real time, and that's why people still run apps in COBOL. In IT, we rarely get rid of stuff, rather we add on another coat of paint until the wood rots out or the roof is going to cave in. All right, the last key finding we want to highlight is going to bring us back to the cloud repatriation myth. Followers of this program know it's a real sore spot with us. We've heard the stories about repatriation, we've read the thoughtful articles from VCs on the subject, we've been whispered to by vendors that you should investigate this trend. It's really happening, but the data simply doesn't support it. Here's the question that was posed to these practitioners. If you had unlimited budget and the economy miraculously flipped, what initiatives would you tackle first? Where would you really lean into? The first answer, "I'd rip out legacy on-prem infrastructure and move to the cloud even faster," so, the thing here is, look, maybe renting infrastructure is more expensive than owning, maybe, but if I can optimize my rental with better utilization, turn off compute, use things like serverless, get on a steeper and higher performance over time, and lower cost Silicon curve with things like Graviton, tap best of breed tools in AI, and other areas that make my business more competitive. Move faster, fail faster, experiment more quickly, and cheaply, what's that worth? Even the most hard-o CFOs understand the business benefits far outweigh the possible added cost per gigabyte, and, again, I stress "possible." Okay, other interesting comments from practitioners. "I'd hire 50 more data engineers and accelerate our real-time data capabilities to better target customers." Real-time is becoming a thing. AI is being injected into data and apps to make faster decisions, perhaps, with less or even no human involvement. That's on the rise. Next quote, "I'd like to focus on resolving the concerns around cloud data compliance," so, again, despite the risks of data being spread out in different clouds, organizations realize cloud is a given, and they want to find ways to make it work better, not move away from it. The same thing in the next one, "I would automate the data analytics pipeline and focus on a safer way to share data across the states without moving it," and, finally, "The way I'm addressing complexity is to standardize on a single cloud." MonoCloud is actually a thing. We're hearing this more and more. Yes, my company has multiple clouds, but in my group, we've standardized on a single cloud to simplify things, and this is a somewhat dangerous trend, because it's creating even more silos and it's an opportunity that needs to be addressed, and that's why we've been talking so much about supercloud is a cross-cloud, unifying, architectural framework, or, perhaps, it's a platform. In fact, that's a question that we will be exploring later this month at Supercloud2 live from our Palo Alto Studios. Is supercloud an architecture or is it a platform? And in this program, we're featuring technologists, analysts, practitioners to explore the intersection between data and cloud and the future of cloud computing, so, you don't want to miss this opportunity. Go to supercloud.world. You can register for free and participate in the event directly. All right, thanks for listening. That's a wrap. I'd like to thank Alex Myerson, who's on production and manages our podcast, Ken Schiffman as well, Kristen Martin and Cheryl Knight, they helped get the word out on social media, and in our newsletters, and Rob Hof is our editor-in-chief over at siliconangle.com. He does some great editing. Thank you, all. Remember, all these episodes are available as podcasts wherever you listen. All you've got to do is search "breaking analysis podcasts." I publish each week on wikibon.com and siliconangle.com where you can email me directly at david.vellante@siliconangle.com or DM me, @Dante, or comment on our LinkedIn posts. By all means, check out etr.ai. They get the best survey data in the enterprise tech business. We'll be doing our annual predictions post in a few weeks, once the data comes out from the January survey. This is Dave Vellante for theCUBE Insights powered by ETR. Thanks for watching, everybody, and we'll see you next time on "Breaking Analysis." (upbeat music)

(upbeat music) >> Hello, everybody. This is Dave Vellante. Welcome back to Supercloud2, where we're exploring the intersection of data analytics and the future of cloud. In this segment, we're going to look at how the Supercloud will support a new class of applications, not just work that runs on multiple clouds, but rather a new breed of apps that can orchestrate things in the real world. Think Uber for many types of businesses. These applications, they're not about codifying forms or business processes. They're about orchestrating people, places, and things in a business ecosystem. And I'm pleased to welcome my colleague and friend, George Gilbert, former Gartner Analyst, Wiki Bond market analyst, former equities analyst as my co-host. And we're thrilled to have Tristan Handy, who's the founder and CEO of DBT Labs and Bob Muglia, who's the former President of Microsoft's Enterprise business and former CEO of Snowflake. Welcome all, gentlemen. Thank you for coming on the program. >> Good to be here. >> Thanks for having us. >> Hey, look, I'm going to start actually with the SuperCloud because both Tristan and Bob, you've read the definition. Thank you for doing that. And Bob, you have some really good input, some thoughts on maybe some of the drawbacks and how we can advance this. So what are your thoughts in reading that definition around SuperCloud? >> Well, I thought first of all that you did a very good job of laying out all of the characteristics of it and helping to define it overall. But I do think it can be tightened a bit, and I think it's helpful to do it in as short a way as possible. And so in the last day I've spent a little time thinking about how to take it and write a crisp definition. And here's my go at it. This is one day old, so gimme a break if it's going to change. And of course we have to follow the industry, and so that, and whatever the industry decides, but let's give this a try. So in the way I think you're defining it, what I would say is a SuperCloud is a platform that provides programmatically consistent services hosted on heterogeneous cloud providers. >> Boom. Nice. Okay, great. I'm going to go back and read the script on that one and tighten that up a bit. Thank you for spending the time thinking about that. Tristan, would you add anything to that or what are your thoughts on the whole SuperCloud concept? >> So as I read through this, I fully realize that we need a word for this thing because I have experienced the inability to talk about it as well. But for many of us who have been living in the Confluence, Snowflake, you know, this world of like new infrastructure, this seems fairly uncontroversial. Like I read through this, and I'm just like, yeah, this is like the world I've been living in for years now. And I noticed that you called out Snowflake for being an example of this, but I think that there are like many folks, myself included, for whom this world like fully exists today. >> Yeah, I think that's a fair, I dunno if it's criticism, but people observe, well, what's the big deal here? It's just kind of what we're living in today. It reminds me of, you know, Tim Burns Lee saying, well, this is what the internet was supposed to be. It was supposed to be Web 2.0, so maybe this is what multi-cloud was supposed to be. Let's turn our attention to apps. Bob first and then go to Tristan. Bob, what are data apps to you? When people talk about data products, is that what they mean? Are we talking about something more, different? What are data apps to you? >> Well, to understand data apps, it's useful to contrast them to something, and I just use the simple term people apps. I know that's a little bit awkward, but it's clear. And almost everything we work with, almost every application that we're familiar with, be it email or Salesforce or any consumer app, those are applications that are targeted at responding to people. You know, in contrast, a data application reacts to changes in data and uses some set of analytic services to autonomously take action. So where applications that we're familiar with respond to people, data apps respond to changes in data. And they both do something, but they do it for different reasons. >> Got it. You know, George, you and I were talking about, you know, it comes back to SuperCloud, broad definition, narrow definition. Tristan, how do you see it? Do you see it the same way? Do you have a different take on data apps? >> Oh, geez. This is like a conversation that I don't know has an end. It's like been, I write a substack, and there's like this little community of people who all write substack. We argue with each other about these kinds of things. Like, you know, as many different takes on this question as you can find, but the way that I think about it is that data products are atomic units of functionality that are fundamentally data driven in nature. So a data product can be as simple as an interactive dashboard that is like actually had design thinking put into it and serves a particular user group and has like actually gone through kind of a product development life cycle. And then a data app or data application is a kind of cohesive end-to-end experience that often encompasses like many different data products. So from my perspective there, this is very, very related to the way that these things are produced, the kinds of experiences that they're provided, that like data innovates every product that we've been building in, you know, software engineering for, you know, as long as there have been computers. >> You know, Jamak Dagani oftentimes uses the, you know, she doesn't name Spotify, but I think it's Spotify as that kind of example she uses. But I wonder if we can maybe try to take some examples. If you take, like George, if you take a CRM system today, you're inputting leads, you got opportunities, it's driven by humans, they're really inputting the data, and then you got this system that kind of orchestrates the business process, like runs a forecast. But in this data driven future, are we talking about the app itself pulling data in and automatically looking at data from the transaction systems, the call center, the supply chain and then actually building a plan? George, is that how you see it? >> I go back to the example of Uber, may not be the most sophisticated data app that we build now, but it was like one of the first where you do have users interacting with their devices as riders trying to call a car or driver. But the app then looks at the location of all the drivers in proximity, and it matches a driver to a rider. It calculates an ETA to the rider. It calculates an ETA then to the destination, and it calculates a price. Those are all activities that are done sort of autonomously that don't require a human to type something into a form. The application is using changes in data to calculate an analytic product and then to operationalize that, to assign the driver to, you know, calculate a price. Those are, that's an example of what I would think of as a data app. And my question then I guess for Tristan is if we don't have all the pieces in place for sort of mainstream companies to build those sorts of apps easily yet, like how would we get started? What's the role of a semantic layer in making that easier for mainstream companies to build? And how do we get started, you know, say with metrics? How does that, how does that take us down that path? >> So what we've seen in the past, I dunno, decade or so, is that one of the most successful business models in infrastructure is taking hard things and rolling 'em up behind APIs. You take messaging, you take payments, and you all of a sudden increase the capability of kind of your median application developer. And you say, you know, previously you were spending all your time being focused on how do you accept credit cards, how do you send SMS payments, and now you can focus on your business logic, and just create the thing. One of, interestingly, one of the things that we still don't know how to API-ify is concepts that live inside of your data warehouse, inside of your data lake. These are core concepts that, you know, you would imagine that the business would be able to create applications around very easily, but in fact that's not the case. It's actually quite challenging to, and involves a lot of data engineering pipeline and all this work to make these available. And so if you really want to make it very easy to create some of these data experiences for users, you need to have an ability to describe these metrics and then to turn them into APIs to make them accessible to application developers who have literally no idea how they're calculated behind the scenes, and they don't need to. >> So how rich can that API layer grow if you start with metric definitions that you've defined? And DBT has, you know, the metric, the dimensions, the time grain, things like that, that's a well scoped sort of API that people can work within. How much can you extend that to say non-calculated business rules or governance information like data reliability rules, things like that, or even, you know, features for an AIML feature store. In other words, it starts, you started pragmatically, but how far can you grow? >> Bob is waiting with bated breath to answer this question. I'm, just really quickly, I think that we as a company and DBT as a product tend to be very pragmatic. We try to release the simplest possible version of a thing, get it out there, and see if people use it. But the idea that, the concept of a metric is really just a first landing pad. The really, there is a physical manifestation of the data and then there's a logical manifestation of the data. And what we're trying to do here is make it very easy to access the logical manifestation of the data, and metric is a way to look at that. Maybe an entity, a customer, a user is another way to look at that. And I'm sure that there will be more kind of logical structures as well. >> So, Bob, chime in on this. You know, what's your thoughts on the right architecture behind this, and how do we get there? >> Yeah, well first of all, I think one of the ways we get there is by what companies like DBT Labs and Tristan is doing, which is incrementally taking and building on the modern data stack and extending that to add a semantic layer that describes the data. Now the way I tend to think about this is a fairly major shift in the way we think about writing applications, which is today a code first approach to moving to a world that is model driven. And I think that's what the big change will be is that where today we think about data, we think about writing code, and we use that to produce APIs as Tristan said, which encapsulates those things together in some form of services that are useful for organizations. And that idea of that encapsulation is never going to go away. It's very, that concept of an API is incredibly useful and will exist well into the future. But what I think will happen is that in the next 10 years, we're going to move to a world where organizations are defining models first of their data, but then ultimately of their business process, their entire business process. Now the concept of a model driven world is a very old concept. I mean, I first started thinking about this and playing around with some early model driven tools, probably before Tristan was born in the early 1980s. And those tools didn't work because the semantics associated with executing the model were too complex to be written in anything other than a procedural language. We're now reaching a time where that is changing, and you see it everywhere. You see it first of all in the world of machine learning and machine learning models, which are taking over more and more of what applications are doing. And I think that's an incredibly important step. And learned models are an important part of what people will do. But if you look at the world today, I will claim that we've always been modeling. Modeling has existed in computers since there have been integrated circuits and any form of computers. But what we do is what I would call implicit modeling, which means that it's the model is written on a whiteboard. It's in a bunch of Slack messages. It's on a set of napkins in conversations that happen and during Zoom. That's where the model gets defined today. It's implicit. There is one in the system. It is hard coded inside application logic that exists across many applications with humans being the glue that connects those models together. And really there is no central place you can go to understand the full attributes of the business, all of the business rules, all of the business logic, the business data. That's going to change in the next 10 years. And we'll start to have a world where we can define models about what we're doing. Now in the short run, the most important models to build are data models and to describe all of the attributes of the data and their relationships. And that's work that DBT Labs is doing. A number of other companies are doing that. We're taking steps along that way with catalogs. People are trying to build more complete ontologies associated with that. The underlying infrastructure is still super, super nascent. But what I think we'll see is this infrastructure that exists today that's building learned models in the form of machine learning programs. You know, some of these incredible machine learning programs in foundation models like GPT and DALL-E and all of the things that are happening in these global scale models, but also all of that needs to get applied to the domains that are appropriate for a business. And I think we'll see the infrastructure developing for that, that can take this concept of learned models and put it together with more explicitly defined models. And this is where the concept of knowledge graphs come in and then the technology that underlies that to actually implement and execute that, which I believe are relational knowledge graphs. >> Oh, oh wow. There's a lot to unpack there. So let me ask the Colombo question, Tristan, we've been making fun of your youth. We're just, we're just jealous. Colombo, I'll explain it offline maybe. >> I watch Colombo. >> Okay. All right, good. So but today if you think about the application stack and the data stack, which is largely an analytics pipeline. They're separate. Do they, those worlds, do they have to come together in order to achieve Bob's vision? When I talk to practitioners about that, they're like, well, I don't want to complexify the application stack cause the data stack today is so, you know, hard to manage. But but do those worlds have to come together? And you know, through that model, I guess abstraction or translation that Bob was just describing, how do you guys think about that? Who wants to take that? >> I think it's inevitable that data and AI are going to become closer together? I think that the infrastructure there has been moving in that direction for a long time. Whether you want to use the Lakehouse portmanteau or not. There's also, there's a next generation of data tech that is still in the like early stage of being developed. There's a company that I love that is essentially Cross Cloud Lambda, and it's just a wonderful abstraction for computing. So I think that, you know, people have been predicting that these worlds are going to come together for awhile. A16Z wrote a great post on this back in I think 2020, predicting this, and I've been predicting this since since 2020. But what's not clear is the timeline, but I think that this is still just as inevitable as it's been. >> Who's that that does Cross Cloud? >> Let me follow up on. >> Who's that, Tristan, that does Cross Cloud Lambda? Can you name names? >> Oh, they're called Modal Labs. >> Modal Labs, yeah, of course. All right, go ahead, George. >> Let me ask about this vision of trying to put the semantics or the code that represents the business with the data. It gets us to a world that's sort of more data centric, where data's not locked inside or behind the APIs of different applications so that we don't have silos. But at the same time, Bob, I've heard you talk about building the semantics gradually on top of, into a knowledge graph that maybe grows out of a data catalog. And the vision of getting to that point, essentially the enterprise's metadata and then the semantics you're going to add onto it are really stored in something that's separate from the underlying operational and analytic data. So at the same time then why couldn't we gradually build semantics beyond the metric definitions that DBT has today? In other words, you build more and more of the semantics in some layer that DBT defines and that sits above the data management layer, but any requests for data have to go through the DBT layer. Is that a workable alternative? Or where, what type of limitations would you face? >> Well, I think that it is the way the world will evolve is to start with the modern data stack and, you know, which is operational applications going through a data pipeline into some form of data lake, data warehouse, the Lakehouse, whatever you want to call it. And then, you know, this wide variety of analytics services that are built together. To the point that Tristan made about machine learning and data coming together, you see that in every major data cloud provider. Snowflake certainly now supports Python and Java. Databricks is of course building their data warehouse. Certainly Google, Microsoft and Amazon are doing very, very similar things in terms of building complete solutions that bring together an analytics stack that typically supports languages like Python together with the data stack and the data warehouse. I mean, all of those things are going to evolve, and they're not going to go away because that infrastructure is relatively new. It's just being deployed by companies, and it solves the problem of working with petabytes of data if you need to work with petabytes of data, and nothing will do that for a long time. What's missing is a layer that understands and can model the semantics of all of this. And if you need to, if you want to model all, if you want to talk about all the semantics of even data, you need to think about all of the relationships. You need to think about how these things connect together. And unfortunately, there really is no platform today. None of our existing platforms are ultimately sufficient for this. It was interesting, I was just talking to a customer yesterday, you know, a large financial organization that is building out these semantic layers. They're further along than many companies are. And you know, I asked what they're building it on, and you know, it's not surprising they're using a, they're using combinations of some form of search together with, you know, textual based search together with a document oriented database. In this case it was Cosmos. And that really is kind of the state of the art right now. And yet those products were not built for this. They don't really, they can't manage the complicated relationships that are required. They can't issue the queries that are required. And so a new generation of database needs to be developed. And fortunately, you know, that is happening. The world is developing a new set of relational algorithms that will be able to work with hundreds of different relations. If you look at a SQL database like Snowflake or a big query, you know, you get tens of different joins coming together, and that query is going to take a really long time. Well, fortunately, technology is evolving, and it's possible with new join algorithms, worst case, optimal join algorithms they're called, where you can join hundreds of different relations together and run semantic queries that you simply couldn't run. Now that technology is nascent, but it's really important, and I think that will be a requirement to have this semantically reach its full potential. In the meantime, Tristan can do a lot of great things by building up on what he's got today and solve some problems that are very real. But in the long run I think we'll see a new set of databases to support these models. >> So Tristan, you got to respond to that, right? You got to, so take the example of Snowflake. We know it doesn't deal well with complex joins, but they're, they've got big aspirations. They're building an ecosystem to really solve some of these problems. Tristan, you guys are part of that ecosystem, and others, but please, your thoughts on what Bob just shared. >> Bob, I'm curious if, I would have no idea what you were talking about except that you introduced me to somebody who gave me a demo of a thing and do you not want to go there right now? >> No, I can talk about it. I mean, we can talk about it. Look, the company I've been working with is Relational AI, and they're doing this work to actually first of all work across the industry with academics and research, you know, across many, many different, over 20 different research institutions across the world to develop this new set of algorithms. They're all fully published, just like SQL, the underlying algorithms that are used by SQL databases are. If you look today, every single SQL database uses a similar set of relational algorithms underneath that. And those algorithms actually go back to system R and what IBM developed in the 1970s. We're just, there's an opportunity for us to build something new that allows you to take, for example, instead of taking data and grouping it together in tables, treat all data as individual relations, you know, a key and a set of values and then be able to perform purely relational operations on it. If you go back to what, to Codd, and what he wrote, he defined two things. He defined a relational calculus and relational algebra. And essentially SQL is a query language that is translated by the query processor into relational algebra. But however, the calculus of SQL is not even close to the full semantics of the relational mathematics. And it's possible to have systems that can do everything and that can store all of the attributes of the data model or ultimately the business model in a form that is much more natural to work with. >> So here's like my short answer to this. I think that we're dealing in different time scales. I think that there is actually a tremendous amount of work to do in the semantic layer using the kind of technology that we have on the ground today. And I think that there's, I don't know, let's say five years of like really solid work that there is to do for the entire industry, if not more. But the wonderful thing about DBT is that it's independent of what the compute substrate is beneath it. And so if we develop new platforms, new capabilities to describe semantic models in more fine grain detail, more procedural, then we're going to support that too. And so I'm excited about all of it. >> Yeah, so interpreting that short answer, you're basically saying, cause Bob was just kind of pointing to you as incremental, but you're saying, yeah, okay, we're applying it for incremental use cases today, but we can accommodate a much broader set of examples in the future. Is that correct, Tristan? >> I think you're using the word incremental as if it's not good, but I think that incremental is great. We have always been about applying incremental improvement on top of what exists today, but allowing practitioners to like use different workflows to actually make use of that technology. So yeah, yeah, we are a very incremental company. We're going to continue being that way. >> Well, I think Bob was using incremental as a pejorative. I mean, I, but to your point, a lot. >> No, I don't think so. I want to stop that. No, I don't think it's pejorative at all. I think incremental, incremental is usually the most successful path. >> Yes, of course. >> In my experience. >> We agree, we agree on that. >> Having tried many, many moonshot things in my Microsoft days, I can tell you that being incremental is a good thing. And I'm a very big believer that that's the way the world's going to go. I just think that there is a need for us to build something new and that ultimately that will be the solution. Now you can argue whether it's two years, three years, five years, or 10 years, but I'd be shocked if it didn't happen in 10 years. >> Yeah, so we all agree that incremental is less disruptive. Boom, but Tristan, you're, I think I'm inferring that you believe you have the architecture to accommodate Bob's vision, and then Bob, and I'm inferring from Bob's comments that maybe you don't think that's the case, but please. >> No, no, no. I think that, so Bob, let me put words into your mouth and you tell me if you disagree, DBT is completely useless in a world where a large scale cloud data warehouse doesn't exist. We were not able to bring the power of Python to our users until these platforms started supporting Python. Like DBT is a layer on top of large scale computing platforms. And to the extent that those platforms extend their functionality to bring more capabilities, we will also service those capabilities. >> Let me try and bridge the two. >> Yeah, yeah, so Bob, Bob, Bob, do you concur with what Tristan just said? >> Absolutely, I mean there's nothing to argue with in what Tristan just said. >> I wanted. >> And it's what he's doing. It'll continue to, I believe he'll continue to do it, and I think it's a very good thing for the industry. You know, I'm just simply saying that on top of that, I would like to provide Tristan and all of those who are following similar paths to him with a new type of database that can actually solve these problems in a much more architected way. And when I talk about Cosmos with something like Mongo or Cosmos together with Elastic, you're using Elastic as the join engine, okay. That's the purpose of it. It becomes a poor man's join engine. And I kind of go, I know there's a better answer than that. I know there is, but that's kind of where we are state of the art right now. >> George, we got to wrap it. So give us the last word here. Go ahead, George. >> Okay, I just, I think there's a way to tie together what Tristan and Bob are both talking about, and I want them to validate it, which is for five years we're going to be adding or some number of years more and more semantics to the operational and analytic data that we have, starting with metric definitions. My question is for Bob, as DBT accumulates more and more of those semantics for different enterprises, can that layer not run on top of a relational knowledge graph? And what would we lose by not having, by having the knowledge graph store sort of the joins, all the complex relationships among the data, but having the semantics in the DBT layer? >> Well, I think this, okay, I think first of all that DBT will be an environment where many of these semantics are defined. The question we're asking is how are they stored and how are they processed? And what I predict will happen is that over time, as companies like DBT begin to build more and more richness into their semantic layer, they will begin to experience challenges that customers want to run queries, they want to ask questions, they want to use this for things where the underlying infrastructure becomes an obstacle. I mean, this has happened in always in the history, right? I mean, you see major advances in computer science when the data model changes. And I think we're on the verge of a very significant change in the way data is stored and structured, or at least metadata is stored and structured. Again, I'm not saying that anytime in the next 10 years, SQL is going to go away. In fact, more SQL will be written in the future than has been written in the past. And those platforms will mature to become the engines, the slicer dicers of data. I mean that's what they are today. They're incredibly powerful at working with large amounts of data, and that infrastructure is maturing very rapidly. What is not maturing is the infrastructure to handle all of the metadata and the semantics that that requires. And that's where I say knowledge graphs are what I believe will be the solution to that. >> But Tristan, bring us home here. It sounds like, let me put pause at this, is that whatever happens in the future, we're going to leverage the vast system that has become cloud that we're talking about a supercloud, sort of where data lives irrespective of physical location. We're going to have to tap that data. It's not necessarily going to be in one place, but give us your final thoughts, please. >> 100% agree. I think that the data is going to live everywhere. It is the responsibility for both the metadata systems and the data processing engines themselves to make sure that we can join data across cloud providers, that we can join data across different physical regions and that we as practitioners are going to kind of start forgetting about details like that. And we're going to start thinking more about how we want to arrange our teams, how does the tooling that we use support our team structures? And that's when data mesh I think really starts to get very, very critical as a concept. >> Guys, great conversation. It was really awesome to have you. I can't thank you enough for spending time with us. Really appreciate it. >> Thanks a lot. >> All right. This is Dave Vellante for George Gilbert, John Furrier, and the entire Cube community. Keep it right there for more content. You're watching SuperCloud2. (upbeat music)

(energizing music) >> Welcome back, everyone to the Cube and Druva special presentation of why ransomware isn't your only problem. I'm John Furrier, host of The Cube. We're here with W. Curtis Preston, Curtis Preston as he is known in the industry, Chief Technical Cult Evangelist at Druva. Curtis, great to see you. We're here at why ransomware isn't your only problem. Great to see you. Thanks for coming on. >> Happy to be here. >> So we always see each other events now. Events are back, so it's great to have you here for this special presentation. The white paper from IDC really talks about this in detail. I can get your thoughts, and I'd like you to reflect on the analysis that we've been covering here and the survey data, how it lines up with the real world that you're seeing out there. >> Yeah, I think it's the survey results really, I'd like to say that they surprised me, but unfortunately they didn't. The data protection world has been this way or a while where there's this difference in belief or difference between the belief and the reality. And what we see is that there are a number of organizations that have been successfully hit by ransomware, paid the ransom and or lost data. And yet the same people that were surveyed, they had the high degrees of confidence in their backup system and you know, I could probably go on for an hour as to the various reasons why that would be the case, but I think that this long running problem that as long as I've been associated with backups, which, you know has been a while, it's that problem of, you know nobody wants to be the backup person. And people often just, they don't want to have anything to do with the backup system. And so it sort of exists in this vacuum. And so then management is like, oh the backup system's great, because the backup person often, you know, might say that it's great because maybe it's their job to say so. But the reality has always been very, very different. >> It's funny, you know, we're good boss, we got this covered. >> Good, it's all good, it's all good. >> Yeah, the fingers crossed, right? So again, this is the reality and as it becomes backup and recovery, which we've talked about many times on The Cube, certainly we have with you before, but now with ransomware also, the other thing is people get ransomware hit multiple times. So it's not only like to get hit once. So you know, this is a constant chasing the tail on some ends, but there are some tools out there that you guys have a solution. And so let's get into that. You know, you have had hands on backup experience. What are the points that surprise you the most about what's going on in this world and the realities of how people should be going forward? What's your take? >> Well, I would say that the one part in the survey that surprised me the most was people that had a huge, you know, that there was a huge percentage of people that said that they had a you know, a ransomware response, you know in readiness program. And you look at that and how could you be, that higher percentage of people be comfortable with their ransomware readiness program and you know which includes a number of things, right? There's the cyber attack aspect of responding to a ransomware attack, and then there's the recovery aspect. And so you believe that your company was ready for that, and then you go, and I think it was 67% of the people in the survey paid the ransom, which as as a person who, you know, has spent my entire career trying to help people successfully recover their data that number I think just hurt me the most is that, because you talked about reinfections. The surest way to guarantee that you get re-attacked and reinfected, is to pay the ransom. This goes back all the way, ransom since the beginning of time, right? Everyone knows if you pay the blackmail all you're telling people is that you pay blackmail. >> And you're in business, you're a good customer. ARR, (indistinct) >> Yeah, exactly. So the fact that, you know 60 what, two thirds, of the people that were attacked by ransomware paid the ransom, that one statistic just hurt my heart. >> Yeah, and I think this is the reality. I mean, we go back and even the psychology of the practitioners was, you know, it's super important to get back in recovery, and that's been around for a long time, but now that's an attack vector, okay? And there's dollars involved, like I said the ARR, I'm joking, but there's recurring revenue for the bad guys if they know you're paying up and if you're stupid enough not to change, you're tooling, right? So again, it works both ways. So I got to ask you, why do you think so many owners are unable to successfully respond after an attack? Is it because, they know it's coming, I mean, they're not that dumb. I mean, they have to know it's coming. Why aren't they responding successfully to this? >> I think it's a litany of things starting with the aspect that I mentioned before that nobody wants to have anything to do with the backup system, right? So nobody wants to be the one to raise their hand because if you're the one that raises their hand you know what, that's a good idea, Curtis why don't you look into that? Right, nobody wants to be-- >> Where's that guy now? He doesn't work here anymore. Yeah, but I hear where you come from. >> Exactly. >> Psychology. >> Yeah, so there's that. But then the second is that because of that no one's looking at the fact that backups are the attack vector, they become the attack vector. And so because they're the attack vector they have to be protected as much if not more than the rest of the environment. The rest of the environment can live off of active directory and you know, things like Okta so that you can have SSO and things like that. The backup environment has to be segregated in a very special way. Backups have to be stored completely separate from your environment. The login and authentication and authorization system needs to be completely separate from your typical environment, why? Because if that production environment is compromised now knowing that the attacks or that the backup systems are a significant portion of the attack vector, then if the production system is compromised then the backup system is compromised. So you've got to segregate all of that. And I just don't think that people are thinking about that. You know and they're using the same backup techniques that they've used for many, many years. >> So what you're saying is that the attack vectors and the attackers are getting smarter. They're saying, hey, we'll just take out the backup first so they can't backup, so we got the ransomware. It makes sense. >> Yeah, exactly. The largest ransomware group out there the Conti Ransomware Group, they are specifically targeting specific backup vendors. They know how to recognize the backup servers. They know how to recognize where the backups are stored and they are exfiltrating the backups first and then deleting them, and then letting you know you have ransom. >> Okay, so you guys have a lot of customers. They all kind of have the same problem. What's the patterns that you're seeing? How are they evolving? What are some of the things that they're implementing? What is the best practice? >> Well again, you've got to fully segregate that data. There are, and everything about how that data is stored and everything about how that data's created and accessed, there are ways to do that with other, you know with other commercial products. You can take a standard product and put a number of layers of defense on top of it or you can switch to the way Druva does things which is a SAS offering that stores your data completely in the cloud in our account, right? So your account could be completely compromised. That has nothing to do with our account. And the, it's a completely different authentication and authorization system. You've got multiple layers of defense between your computing environment and where we store your backups. So basically what you get by default with the way Druva stores your backups is the best you can get after doing many, many layers of defense on the other side and having to do all that work. With us, you just log in and you get all of that. >> I guess, how do you break the laws of physics? I guess that's the question here. >> Well, that's the other thing, is that by storing the data in the cloud, we do and I've said this a few times, that you get to break the laws of physics. And the only way to do that is time travel. And that's what... (chuckles) so yeah, so Druva has time travel. This isn't a criticism, by the way. I don't think this is our official position, but the idea is that the only way to restore data as fast as possible is to restore it before you actually need it. And that's what kind of, what I mean by time travel in that you basically, you configure your DR, your disaster recovery environment in Druva one time, and then we are pre restoring your data as often as you tell us to do to bring your DR environment up to the current environment as quickly as we can. So that in a disaster recovery scenario which is part of your ransomware response, right? Again, there are many different parts but when you get to actually restoring the data you should be able to just push a button and go. The data should already be restored. And that's the way that you break the laws of physics, is you break the laws of time. >> Well, everyone wants to know the next question, and this is the real big question is, are you from the future? >> Yeah. Very much the future. >> What's it like in the future? Back at recovery as a restorer, air gaping everything? >> Yeah. It, well it's a world where people don't have to worry about their backups. I like to use the phrase, get out of the backup business. Just get into the restore business. You know, I'm a grandfather now, and I love having a granddaughter and I often make the joke that if I've known how great grandkids were I would've skipped straight to them, right? Not possible. Just like this. Recoveries are great. Backups are really hard. So in the future, if you use a SAS data protection system and data resiliency system, you can just do recoveries and not have to worry about backups. >> Yeah. And what's great about your background is you've got a lot of historical perspective. I've seen that in the ways of innovation. Now it really is about the recovery and real time. So a lot of good stuff going on and got things automated things got to be rocking and rolling. >> Absolutely. Yeah, I do remember again, having worked so hard with many clients over the years, back then we worked so hard just to get the backup done. There was very little time to work on the recovery. And I really, I kid you not that our customers don't have to do all of those things that all of our competitors have to do to you know, to try to break the laws of physics. I've been fighting the laws of physics my entire career to get the backup done in the first place. Then to secure all the data, right, to air gap it and make sure that a ransomware attack isn't going to attack it. Our customers get to get straight to a fully automated disaster recovery environment that they get to test as often as possible and they get to do a full test by simply pressing a single button. And you know, I wish everybody had that ability. >> Yeah, I mean security's a big part of it. Data's in the middle of it. All this is now mainstream, front lines, great stuff. Curtis, great to have you on, bring that perspective, and thanks for the insight. Really appreciate it. >> Always happy to talk about my favorite subject. (bright music)

>>Keon Cloud Native Con kicks off in Detroit on October 24th, and we're pleased to have Stewart Miniman, who's the director of Market Insights, hi, at, for hybrid platforms at Red Hat back in the studio to help us understand the key trends to look for at the events. Do welcome back, like old, old, old >>Home. Thank you, David. It's great to, great to see you and always love doing these previews, even though Dave, come on. How many years have I told you Cloud native con, It's a hoodie crowd. They're gonna totally call you out for where in a tie and things like that. I, I know you want to be an ESPN sportscaster, but you know, I I, I, I still don't think even after, you know, this show's been around for so many years that there's gonna be too many ties into Troy. I >>Know I left the hoodie in my off, I'm sorry folks, but hey, we'll just have to go for it. Okay. Containers generally, and Kubernetes specifically continue to show very strong spending momentum in the ETR survey data. So let's bring up this slide that shows the ETR sectors, all the sectors in the tax taxonomy with net score or spending velocity in the vertical axis and pervasiveness on the horizontal axis. Now, that red dotted line that you see, that marks the elevated 40% mark, anything above that is considered highly elevated in terms of momentum. Now, for years, the big four areas of momentum that shine above all the rest have been cloud containers, rpa, and ML slash ai for the first time in 10 quarters, ML and AI and RPA have dropped below the 40% line, leaving only cloud and containers in rarefied air. Now, Stu, I'm sure this data doesn't surprise you, but what do you make of this? >>Yeah, well, well, Dave, I, I did an interview with at Deepak who owns all the container and open source activity at Amazon earlier this year, and his comment was, the default deployment mechanism in Amazon is containers. So when I look at your data and I see containers and cloud going in sync, yeah, that, that's, that's how we see things. We're helping lots of customers in their overall adoption. And this cloud native ecosystem is still, you know, we're still in that Cambridge explosion of new projects, new opportunities, AI's a great workload for these type type of technologies. So it's really becoming pervasive in the marketplace. >>And, and I feel like the cloud and containers go hand in hand, so it's not surprising to see those two above >>The 40%. You know, there, there's nothing to say that, Look, can I run my containers in my data center and not do the public cloud? Sure. But in the public cloud, the default is the container. And one of the hot discussions we've been having in this ecosystem for a number of years is edge computing. And of course, you know, I want something that that's small and lightweight and can do things really fast. A lot of times it's an AI workload out there, and containers is a great fit at the edge too. So wherever it goes, containers is a good fit, which has been keeping my group at Red Hat pretty busy. >>So let's talk about some of those high level stats that we put together and preview for the event. So it's really around the adoption of open source software and Kubernetes. Here's, you know, a few fun facts. So according to the state of enterprise open source report, which was published by Red Hat, although it was based on a blind survey, nobody knew that that Red Hat was, you know, initiating it. 80% of IT execs expect to increase their use of enterprise open source software. Now, the CNCF community has currently more than 120,000 developers. That's insane when you think about that developer resource. 73% of organizations in the most recent CNCF annual survey are using Kubernetes. Now, despite the momentum, according to that same Red Hat survey, adoption barriers remain for some organizations. Stu, I'd love you to talk about this specifically around skill sets, and then we've highlighted some of the other trends that we expect to see at the event around Stu. I'd love to, again, your, get your thoughts on the preview. You've done a number of these events, automation, security, governance, governance at scale, edge deployments, which you just mentioned among others. Now Kubernetes is eight years old, and I always hear people talking about there's something coming beyond Kubernetes, but it looks like we're just getting started. Yeah, >>Dave, It, it is still relatively early days. The CMC F survey, I think said, you know, 96% of companies when they, when CMC F surveyed them last year, were either deploying Kubernetes or had plans to deploy it. But when I talked to enterprises, nobody has said like, Hey, we've got every group on board and all of our applications are on. It is a multi-year journey for most companies and plenty of them. If you, you look at the general adoption of technology, we're still working through kind of that early majority. We, you know, passed the, the chasm a couple of years ago. But to a point, you and I we're talking about this ecosystem, there are plenty of people in this ecosystem that could care less about containers and Kubernetes. Lots of conversations at this show won't even talk about Kubernetes. You've got, you know, big security group that's in there. >>You've got, you know, certain workloads like we talked about, you know, AI and ml and that are in there. And automation absolutely is playing a, a good role in what's going on here. So in some ways, Kubernetes kind of takes a, a backseat because it is table stakes at this point. So lots of people involved in it, lots of activities still going on. I mean, we're still at a cadence of three times a year now. We slowed it down from four times a year as an industry, but there's, there's still lots of innovation happening, lots of adoption, and oh my gosh, Dave, I mean, there's just no shortage of new projects and new people getting involved. And what's phenomenal about it is there's, you know, end user practitioners that aren't just contributing. But many of the projects were spawned out of work by the likes of Intuit and Spotify and, and many others that created some of the projects that sit alongside or above the, the, you know, the container orchestration itself. >>So before we talked about some of that, it's, it's kind of interesting. It's like Kubernetes is the big dog, right? And it's, it's kind of maturing after, you know, eight years, but it's still important. I wanna share another data point that underscores the traction that containers generally are getting in Kubernetes specifically have, So this is data from the latest ETR survey and shows the spending breakdown for Kubernetes in the ETR data set for it's cut for respondents with 50 or more citations in, in by the IT practitioners that lime green is new adoptions, the forest green is spending 6% or more relative to last year. The gray is flat spending year on year, and those little pink bars, that's 6% or down spending, and the bright red is retirements. So they're leaving the platform. And the blue dots are net score, which is derived by subtracting the reds from the greens. And the yellow dots are pervasiveness in the survey relative to the sector. So the big takeaway here is that there is virtually no red, essentially zero churn across all sectors, large companies, public companies, private firms, telcos, finance, insurance, et cetera. So again, sometimes I hear this things beyond Kubernetes, you've mentioned several, but it feels like Kubernetes is still a driving force, but a lot of other projects around Kubernetes, which we're gonna hear about at the show. >>Yeah. So, so, so Dave, right? First of all, there was for a number of years, like, oh wait, you know, don't waste your time on, on containers because serverless is gonna rule the world. Well, serverless is now a little bit of a broader term. Can I do a serverless viewpoint for my developers that they don't need to think about the infrastructure but still have containers underneath it? Absolutely. So our friends at Amazon have a solution called Fargate, their proprietary offering to kind of hide that piece of it. And in the open source world, there's a project called Can Native, I think it's the second or third can Native Con's gonna happen at the cncf. And even if you use this, I can still call things over on Lambda and use some of those functions. So we know Dave, it is additive and nothing ever dominates the entire world and nothing ever dies. >>So we have, we have a long runway of activities still to go on in containers and Kubernetes. We're always looking for what that next thing is. And what's great about this ecosystem is most of it tends to be additive and plug into the pieces there, there's certain tools that, you know, span beyond what can happen in the container world and aren't limited to it. And there's others that are specific for it. And to talk about the industries, Dave, you know, I love, we we have, we have a community event that we run that's gonna happen at Cubans called OpenShift Commons. And when you look at like, who's speaking there? Oh, we've got, you know, for Lockheed Martin, University of Michigan and I g Bank all speaking there. So you look and it's like, okay, cool, I've got automotive, I've got, you know, public sector, I've got, you know, university education and I've got finance. So all of you know, there is not an industry that is not touched by this. And the general wave of software adoption is the reason why, you know, not just adoption, but the creation of new software is one of the differentiators for companies. And that is what, that's the reason why I do containers, isn't because it's some cool technology and Kubernetes is great to put on my resume, but that it can actually accelerate my developers and help me create technology that makes me respond to my business and my ultimate end users. Well, >>And you know, as you know, we've been talking about the Supercloud a lot and the Kubernetes is clearly enabler to, to Supercloud, but I wanted to go back, you and John Furrier have done so many of, you know, the, the cube cons, but but go back to Docker con before Kubernetes was even a thing. And so you sort of saw this, you know, grow. I think there's what, how many projects are in CNCF now? I mean, hundreds. Hundreds, okay. And so you're, Will we hear things in Detroit, things like, you know, new projects like, you know, Argo and capabilities around SI store and things like that? Well, you're gonna hear a lot about that. Or is it just too much to cover? >>So I, I mean the, the good news, Dave, is that the CNCF really is, is a good steward for this community and new things got in get in. So there's so much going on with the existing projects that some of the new ones sometimes have a little bit of a harder time making a little bit of buzz. One of the more interesting ones is a project that's been around for a while that I think back to the first couple of Cube Cuban that John and I did service Mesh and Istio, which was created by Google, but lived under basically a, I guess you would say a Google dominated governance for a number of years is now finally under the CNCF Foundation. So I talked to a number of companies over the years and definitely many of the contributors over the years that didn't love that it was a Google Run thing, and now it is finally part. >>So just like Kubernetes is, we have SEO and also can Native that I mentioned before also came outta Google and those are all in the cncf. So will there be new projects? Yes. The CNCF is sometimes they, they do matchmaking. So in some of the observability space, there were a couple of projects that they said, Hey, maybe you can go merge down the road. And they ended up doing that. So there's still you, you look at all these projects and if I was an end user saying, Oh my God, there is so much change and so many projects, you know, I can't spend the time in the effort to learn about all of these. And that's one of the challenges and something obviously at Red Hat, we spend a lot of time figuring out, you know, not to make winners, but which are the things that customers need, Where can we help make them run in production for our, our customers and, and help bring some stability and a little bit of security for the overall ecosystem. >>Well, speaking of security, security and, and skill sets, we've talked about those two things and they sort of go hand in hand when I go to security events. I mean, we're at reinforced last summer, we were just recently at the CrowdStrike event. A lot of the discussion is sort of best practice because it's so complicated. And, and, and will you, I presume you're gonna hear a lot of that here because security securing containers now, you know, the whole shift left thing and shield right is, is a complicated matter, especially when you saw with the earlier data from the Red Hat survey, the the gaps are around skill sets. People don't have the skill. So should we expect to hear a lot about that, A lot of sort of how to, how to take advantage of some of these new capabilities? >>Yeah, Dave, absolutely. So, you know, one of the conversations going on in the community right now is, you know, has DevOps maybe played out as we expect to see it? There's a newer term called platform engineering, and how much do I need to do there? Something that I, I know your, your team's written a lot about Dave, is how much do you need to know versus what can you shift to just a platform or a service that I can consume? I've talked a number of times with you since I've been at Red Hat about the cloud services that we offer. So you want to use our offering in the public cloud. Our first recommendation is, hey, we've got cloud services, how much Kubernetes do you really want to learn versus you want to do what you can build on top of it, modernize the pieces and have less running the plumbing and electric and more, you know, taking advantage of the, the technologies there. So that's a big thing we've seen, you know, we've got a big SRE team that can manage that for use so that you have to spend less time worrying about what really is un differentiated heavy lifting and spend more time on what's important to your business and your >>Customers. So, and that's, and that's through a managed service. >>Yeah, absolutely. >>That whole space is just taken off. All right, Stu I'll give you the final word. You know, what are you excited about for, for, for this upcoming event and Detroit? Interesting choice of venue? Yeah, >>Look, first of off, easy flight. I've, I've never been to Detroit, so I'm, I'm willing to give it a shot and hopefully, you know, that awesome airport. There's some, some, some good things there to learn. The show itself is really a choose your own adventure because there's so much going on. The main show of QAN and cloud Native Con is Wednesday through Friday, but a lot of a really interesting stuff happens on Monday and Tuesday. So we talked about things like OpenShift Commons in the security space. There's cloud Native Security Day, which is actually two days and a SIG store event. There, there's a get up show, there's, you know, k native day. There's so many things that if you want to go deep on a topic, you can go spend like a workshop in some of those you can get hands on to. And then at the show itself, there's so much, and again, you can learn from your peers. >>So it was good to see we had, during the pandemic, it tilted a little bit more vendor heavy because I think most practitioners were pretty busy focused on what they could work on and less, okay, hey, I'm gonna put together a presentation and maybe I'm restricted at going to a show. Yeah, not, we definitely saw that last year when I went to LA I was disappointed how few customer sessions there were. It, it's back when I go look through the schedule now there's way more end users sharing their stories and it, it's phenomenal to see that. And the hallway track, Dave, I didn't go to Valencia, but I hear it was really hopping felt way more like it was pre pandemic. And while there's a few people that probably won't come because Detroit, we think there's, what we've heard and what I've heard from the CNCF team is they are expecting a sizable group up there. I know a lot of the hotels right near the, where it's being held are all sold out. So it should be, should be a lot of fun. Good thing I'm speaking on an edge panel. First time I get to be a speaker at the show, Dave, it's kind of interesting to be a little bit of a different role at the show. >>So yeah, Detroit's super convenient, as I said. Awesome. Airports too. Good luck at the show. So it's a full week. The cube will be there for three days, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday. Thanks for coming. >>Wednesday, Thursday, Friday, sorry, >>Wednesday, Thursday, Friday is the cube, right? So thank you for that. >>And, and no ties from the host, >>No ties, only hoodies. All right Stu, thanks. Appreciate you coming in. Awesome. And thank you for watching this preview of CubeCon plus cloud Native Con with at Stu, which again starts the 24th of October, three days of broadcasting. Go to the cube.net and you can see all the action. We'll see you there.

(bright inspirational music) >> Welcome back everyone to theCUBE and the Druva special presentation of, "Why Ransomware Isn't Your Only Problem." I'm John Furrier, host of theCUBE. We're here with W. Curtis Preston. Curtis Preston, as you know in the industry, Chief Technical Evangelist at Druva. Curtis, great to see you. We're here at, "Why Ransomware Isn't Your Only Problem." Great to see you. Thanks for coming on. >> Happy to be here. >> So we always see each other events, now events are back. So it's great to have you here for this special presentation. The White Paper from IDC really talks about this in detail. Like to get your thoughts, and I'd like you to reflect on the analysis that we've been covering here and the survey data, how it lines up with the real world that you're seeing out there. >> Yeah, I think it's... The survey results really I'd like to say that they surprised me, but unfortunately they didn't. The data protection world has been this way for a while where there's this difference in belief, or difference between the belief and the reality. And what we see is that there are a number of organizations that have been hit- successfully hit by ransomware, paid the ransom and/or lost data. And yet the same people that were surveyed they had high degrees of confidence in their backup system. And, you know, I could probably go on for an hour as to the various reasons why that would be the case, but I think that this long running problem that as long as I've been associated with backups, which, you know, has been a while, it's that problem of, you know, nobody wants to be the backup person. And people often just they don't want to have anything to do with the backup system. And so it sort of exists in this vacuum. And so then management is like, "Oh, the backup system's great," because the backup person often, you know, might say that it's great because maybe it's their job to say so. But the reality has always been very, very different. >> It's funny, you know, "We're good boss, we got this covered." >> Good. All good. It's all good. >> Fingers crossed, right? So again, this is the reality, and as it becomes backup and recovery, which we've talked about many times on theCUBE, certainly we have with you before, but now with ransomware, also, the other thing is people get ransomware hit multiple times. So it's not only like they get hit once. So, you know, this is a constant chasing the tail on some ends, but there are some tools out there. You guys have a solution. And so let's get into that. You know, you have had hands-on backup experience. What are the points that surprise you the most about what's going on in this world and the realities of how people should be going forward? What's your take? >> Well, I would say that the one part in the survey that surprised me the most was people that had a huge, you know, that there was a huge percentage of people that said that they had a, you know, a ransomware response, you know, and readiness program. And you look at that and how could you be, you know, that high a percentage of people be comfortable with their ransomware readiness program and a, you know, which includes a number of things, right? There's the cyber attack aspect of responding to a ransomware attack, and then there's the recovery aspect. And so you believe that your company was ready for that, and then you go, and I think it was 67% of the people in the survey paid the ransom, which as a person who, you know, has spent my entire career trying to help people successfully recover their data, that number I think just hurt me the most is that because you talked about re-infections the surest way to guarantee that you get re-attacked and reinfected is to pay the ransom. This goes back all the way to ransom since the beginning of time, right? Everyone knows if you pay the blackmail all you're telling people is that you pay blackmail. >> You're in business, you're a good customer. ALR for ransomware. >> Yeah. So, the fact that, you know, 60, what, two-thirds of the people that were attacked by ransomware paid the ransom. That one statistic just, just hurt my heart. >> Yeah. And I think this is the reality. I mean, we go back and even the psychology of the practitioners was, you know, super important to get back in recovery. And that's been around for a long time. But now that's an attack vector, okay? And there's dollars involved, like I said, ALR, I'm joking but there's recurring revenue for the for the bad guys if they know you're paying up and if you're stupid enough not to change you're tooling. Right? So again, it works both ways. So, I got to ask you, why do you think so many organizations are unable to successfully respond after an attack? Is it because- they know it's coming. I mean, they're not that dumb. I mean, they have to know it's coming. Why aren't they responding successfully to this? >> I think it's a litany of things starting with that aspect that I mentioned before that nobody wants to have anything to do with the backup system, right? So, nobody wants to be the one to raise their hand because if you're the one that raises their hand "You know what, that's a good idea, Curtis, why don't you look into that?" Right? Nobody wants to be responsible- >> Where's that guy now? He doesn't work here anymore. Yeah, but I hear where you coming from. Psychology (indistinct). >> Yeah. So there's that. But then the second is that because of that no one's looking at the fact that backups are the attack vector. They become the attack vector. And so because they're the attack vector they have to be protected as much, if not more, than the rest of the environment. The rest of the environment can live off of active directory and, you know, and things like Okta so that you can have SSO and things like that. The backup environment has to be segregated in a very special way. Backups have to be stored completely separate from your environment. The login and authentication and authorization system needs to be completely separate from your typical environment. Why? Because if you, if that production environment is compromised now knowing that the attacks or that the backup systems are a significant portion of the attack vector, if the production system is compromised then the backup system is compromised. So you've got to segregate all of that. And I just don't think that people are thinking about that. You know, and they're using the same backup techniques that they've used for many, many years. >> So what you're saying is that the attack vectors and the attackers are getting smarter. They're saying, "Hey, we'll just take out the backup first so they can't back-up. So we got the ransomware." >> Yeah, exactly. The largest ransomware group out there, the Conti ransomware group, they are specifically targeting specific backup vendors. They know how to recognize the backup servers. They know how to recognize where the backups are stored and they are exfiltrating the backups first and then deleting them and then letting you know you have ransom. Right? >> Okay, so you guys have a lot of customers They all kind of have the same- this problem. What's the patterns that you're seeing? How are they evolving? What are some of the things that they're implementing? What is the best practice? >> Well, again, you've got to fully segregate that data, There are, and everything about how that data is stored and everything about how that data is created and accessed. There are ways to do that with other, you know, with other commercial products. You can take a standard product and put a number of layers of defense on top of it or you can switch to the way Druva does things which is a SaaS offering that stores your data completely in the cloud in our account, right? So your account could be completely compromised. That has nothing to do with our account. And the- it's a completely different authentication and authorization system. You've got multiple layers of defense between your computing environment and where we store your backups. So basically what you get by default with the way Druva stores your backups is the best you can get after doing many, many layers of defense on the other side and having to do all that work with us. You just login and you get all of that. >> I guess how do you break the laws of physics? I guess that's the question here. >> Well, when, because that's the other thing is that by storing the data in the cloud, we do it, and I've said this a few times, that you get to break the laws of physics. And the only way to do that is to, is time travel. And that's what, so yeah. So Druva has time travel. What, and this is a courtisism by the way, I don't think this is our official position, but the idea is that the only way to restore data as fast as possible is to restore it before you actually need it. And that's what kind of what I mean by time travel. In that you, basically, you configure your DR, your disaster recovery environment in Druva one time. And then we are pre-restoring your data as often as you tell us to do, to bring your DR environment up to the, you know, the current environment as quickly as we can so that in a disaster recovery scenario which is part of your ransomware response, right? Again, there are many different parts but when you get to actually restoring the data you should be able to just push a button and go. The data should already be restored. And that's the, that's the way that you of physics is you break the laws of time. >> Well, I and everyone wants to know the next question, and this is the real big question is, are you from the future? (light chuckling) >> Yeah. Very much the future. >> What's it like in the future, back-up recovery, how's it restored? Is it air gapping everything? >> Yeah, it, well, it's a world where people don't have to worry about their backups. I like to use the phrase, "get out of the backup business. Just get into the restore business." I, you know, I'm a grandfather now and I love having a granddaughter and I often make the joke that if I'd have known how great grandkids were I would've skipped straight to them. Right? Not possible. Just like this. Recoveries are great. Backups are really hard. So, in the future, if you use a SaaS data protection system and data resiliency system, you can just do recoveries and not have to worry about backups. >> Yeah. And what's great about your background is you've got a lot of historical perspective. I've seen that in the ways of innovation now it's really is about the recovery and real time. So a lot of good stuff going on and got to think automated. Things got to be rocking and rolling. >> Absolutely. Yeah. I do remember, again, having worked so hard with many clients over the years, back then we worked so hard just to get the backup done. There was very little time to work on the recovery. And I really, I kid you not that our customers don't have to do all of those things that all of our competitors have to do to, you know, to try to break the laws of physics. I've been fighting the laws of physics my entire career to get the backup done in the first place. Then to secure all the data, right? To air gap it and make sure that a ransomware attack isn't going to attack it. Our customers get to get straight to a fully automated disaster recovery environment that they get to test as often as possible and they get to do a full test by simply pressing a single button. And you know, I wish that, I wish everybody had that ability. >> Yeah, I mean, security's a big part of it. Data's in the middle of it. All this is now mainstream front lines. Great stuff. Curtis, great to have you on, bring that perspective and thanks for the insight. Really appreciate it. >> Always happy to talk about my favorite subject. >> Alright. We'll be back in a moment. We'll have Stephen Manley, the CTO, and Anjan Srinivas, the GM and VP of Product Management will join me. You're watching theCUBE, the leader in high tech enterprise coverage. (gentle scientific music)

>> From theCUBE Studios in Palo Alto in Boston, bringing you data-driven insights from theCUBE and ETR. This is Breaking Analysis with Dave Vellante. >> Like a marathon runner pumped up on adrenaline, UiPath sprinted to the lead in what is surely going to be a long journey toward enabling the modern automated enterprise. Now, in doing so the company has established itself as a leader in enterprise automation while at the same time, it got out over its skis on critical execution items and it disappointed investors along the way. In our view, the company has plenty of upside potential, but will have to slog through its current challenges, including restructuring its go-to market, prioritizing investments, balancing growth with profitability and dealing with a very difficult macro environment. Hello and welcome to this week's Wikibon Cube insights powered by ETR. In this Breaking Analysis and ahead of Forward 5, UiPath's big customer event, we once again dig into RPA and automation leader, UiPath, to share our most current data and view of the company's prospects relative to the competition and the market overall. Now, since the pandemic, four sectors have consistently outperformed in the overall spending landscape in the ETR dataset, cloud, containers, machine learning/AI, and robotic process automation. For the first time in a long time ML and AI and RPA have dropped below the elevated 40% line shown in this ETR graph with the red dotted line. The data here plots the net score or spending momentum for each sector with we put in video conferencing, we added it in simply to provide height to the vertical access. Now, you see those squiggly lines, they show the pattern for ML/AI and RPA, and they demonstrate the downward trajectory over time with only the most current period dropping below the 40% net score mark. While this is not surprising, it underscores one component of the macro headwinds facing all companies generally and UiPath specifically, that is the discretionary nature of certain technology investments. This has been a topic of conversation on theCUBE since the spring spanning data players like Mongo and Snowflake, the cloud, security, and other sectors. The point is ML/AI and RPA appear to be more discretionary than certain sectors, including cloud. Containers most likely benefit from the fact that much of the activity is spending on internal resources, staff like developers as much of the action in containers is free and open source. Now, security is not shown on this graphic, but as we've reported extensively in the last week at CrowdStrike's Falcon conference, security is somewhat less discretionary than other sectors. Now, as it relates to the big four that we've been highlighting since the pandemic hit, we're starting to see priorities shift from strategic investments like AI and automation to more tactical areas to keep the lights on. UiPath has not been immune to this downward pressure, but the company is still able to show some impressive metrics. Here's a snapshot chart from its investor deck. For the first time UiPath's ARR has surpassed $1 billion. The company now has more than 10,000 customers with a large number generating more than $100,000 in ARR. While not shown in this data, UiPath reported this month in its second quarter close that it had $191 million plus ARR customers, which is up 13% sequentially from its Q1. As well, the company's NRR is over 130%, which is very solid and underscores the low churn that we've previously reported for the company. But with that increased ARR comes slower growth. Here's some data we compiled that shows the dramatic growth in ARR, the blue bars, compared with the rapid deceleration and growth. That's the orange line on the right hand access there. For the first time UiPath's ARR growth dipped below 50% last quarter. Now, we've projected 34% and 25% respectively for the company's Q3 in Q4, which is slightly higher than the upper range of UiPath's CFO, Ashim Gupta's guidance from the last earnings call. That still puts UiPath exiting its fiscal year at a 25% ARR growth rate. While it's not unexpected that a company reaching $1 billion in ARR, that milestone, will begin to show lower, slower growth, net new ARR is well off its fiscal year '22 levels. The other perhaps more concerning factor is the company, despite strong 80% gross margins, remains unprofitable and free cash flow negative. New CEO, Rob Enslin, has emphasized the focus on profitability, and we'd like to see a consistent and more disciplined Rule of 40 or Rule of 45 to 50 type of performance going forward. As a result of this decelerating growth and lowered guidance stemming from significant macro challenges including currency fluctuations and weaker demand, especially in Europe and EP and inconsistent performance, the stock, as shown here, has been on a steady decline. What all growth stocks are facing, you know, challenges relative to inflation, rising interest rates, and looming recession, but as seen here, UiPath has significantly underperformed relative to the tech-heavy NASDAQ. UiPath has admitted to execution challenges, and it has brought in an expanded management team to facilitate its sales transition and desire to become a more strategic platform play versus a tactical point product. Now, adding to this challenge of foreign exchange issues, as we've previously reported unlike most high flying tech companies from Silicon Valley, UiPath has a much larger proportion of its business coming from locations outside of the United States, around 50% of its revenue, in fact. Because it prices in local currencies, when you convert back to appreciated dollars, there are less of them, and that weighs down on revenue. Now, we asked Breaking Analysis contributor, Chip Simonton, for his take on this stock, and he told us, "From a technical standpoint, there's really not much you can say, it just looks like a falling knife. It's trading at an all time low but that doesn't mean it can't go lower. New management with a good product is always a positive with a stock like this, but this is just a bad environment for UiPath and all growth stocks really, and," he added, "95% of money managers have never operated in this type of environment before. So that creates more uncertainty. There will be a bottom, but picking it in this high-inflation, high-interest rate world hasn't worked too well lately. There's really no floor to these stocks that don't have earnings, until you start to trade to cash levels." Well, okay, let's see, UiPath has $1.6 billion in cash in the balance sheet and no debt, so we're a long ways off from that target, the cash value with its current $7 billion valuation. You have to go back to April 2019 to UiPaths Series D to find a $7 billion valuation. So Simonton says, "The stock still could go lower." The valuation range for this stock has been quite remarkable from around $50 billion last May to $7 billion today. That's quite a swing. And the spending data from ETR sort of supports this story. This graphic here shows the net score or spending momentum granularity for UiPath. The lime green is new additions to the platform. The forest green is spending 6% or more. The gray is flat spending. The pink is spending down 6% or worse. And the bright red is churn. Subtract the red from the green and you get net score, which is that blue line. The yellow line is pervasiveness within the data set. Now, that yellow line is skewed somewhat because of Microsoft citations. There's a belief from some that competition from Microsoft is the reason for UiPath's troubles, but Microsoft is really delivering RPA for individuals and isn't an enterprise automation platform at least not today, but it's Microsoft, so you can't discount their presence in the market. And it probably is having some impact, but we think there are many other factors weighing on UiPath. Now, this is data through the July survey but taking a glimpse at the early October returns they're trending with the arrows, meaning less green more gray and red, which is going to lower UiPath's overall net score, which is consistent with the macro headwinds and the business performance that it's been seeing. Now, nonetheless, UiPath continues to get high marks from its customers, and relative to it's peers it maintains a leadership position. So this chart from ETR, shows net score or spending velocity in the vertical access, an overlap or presence in the dataset on the horizontal access. Microsoft continues to have a big presence, and as we mentioned, somewhat skews the data. UiPath has maintained its lead relative to automation anywhere on the horizontal access, and remains ahead of the legacy pack of business process and other RPA vendors. Solonis has popped up in the ETR data set recently as a process mining player and has a pretty high net score. It's a critical space UiPath has entered, via its acquisition of ProcessGold back in October 2019. Now, you can also see what we did is we added in the Gartner Magic Quadrant for robotic process automation. We didn't blow it up here but we circled the position of UiPath. You can see it's leading in both the vertical and the horizontal access, ahead of automation anywhere as well as Microsoft and others. Now, we're still not seeing the likes of SAP, Service Now, and Salesforce showing up in the ETR data, but these enterprise software vendors are in a reasonable position to capitalize on automation opportunities within their installed basis. This is why it's so important that UiPath transitions to an enterprise-wide horizontal play that can cut across multiple ERP, CRM, HCM, and service management platforms. While the big software companies can add automation to their respective stovepipes, and they're doing that, UiPath's opportunity is to bring automation to enable enterprises to build on top of and across these SaaS platforms that most companies are running. Now, on the chart, you see the red arrows slanting down. That signifies the expected trend from the upcoming October ETR survey, which is currently in the field and will run through early next month. Suffice it to say that there is downward spending pressure across the board, and we would expect most of these names, including UiPath, to dip below the 40% dotted line. Now, as it relates to the conversation about platform versus product, let's dig into that a bit more. Here's a graphic from UiPath's investor deck that underscores the move from product to platform. UiPath has expanded its platform from its initial on-prem point product to focus on automating tasks for individuals and back offices to a cloud-first platform approach. The company has added in technology from a number of acquisitions and added organically to those. These include, the previously mentioned, ProcessGold for process discovery, process documentation from the acquisition of StepShot, API automation via the acquisition of Cloud Elements, to its more recent acquisition of Re:infer, a natural language processing specialist. Now, we expect the platform to be a big focus of discussion at Forward 5 next week in Las Vegas. So let's close in on our expectations for the three-day event next week at the Venetian. UiPath's user conference has grown over the years and the Venetian should be by far be the biggest and most heavily attended in the company's history. We expect UiPath to really emphasize the role of automation, specifically in the context of digital transformation, and how UiPath has evolved, again, from point product to platform to support digital transformation. Expect to focus on platform maturity. When UiPath announced its platform intentions back in 2019, which was the last physical face-to-face customer event prior to COVID, it essentially was laying out a statement of direction. And over the past three years, it has matured the platform and taken it from vision to reality. You know, I said the last event, actually, the last event was 2021. Of course, theCUBE was there at the Bellagio in Las Vegas. But prior to that, 2019 is when they laid out that platform vision. Now, in a conjunction with this evolution, the company has evolved its partnerships, pairing up with the likes of Snowflake and the data cloud, CrowdStrike, to provide better security, and, of course, the big Global System Integrators, to help implement enterprise automation. And this is where we expect to hear a lot from customers. I've heard, there'll be over 100 speaking at the show about the outcomes and how they're digitally transforming. Now, I mentioned earlier that we haven't seen the big ERP and enterprise software companies show up yet in the ETR data, but believe me they're out there and they're selling automation and RPA and they're competing. So expect UiPath to position themselves and deposition those companies. Position UiPath as a layer above these bespoke platforms shown here on number four. With process discovery and task discovery, building automation across enterprise apps, and operationalizing process workflows as a horizontal play. And I'm sure there'll be some new graphics on this platform that we can share after the event that will emphasize this positioning. And finally, as we showed earlier in the platform discussion, we expect to hear a lot about the new platform capabilities and use cases, and not just RPA, but process mining, testing, testing automation, which is a new vector of growth for UiPath, document processing. And also, we expect UiPath to address its low code development capabilities to expand the number of people in the organization that can create automation capabilities and automations. Those domain experts is what we're talking about here that deeply understand the business but aren't software engineers. Enabling them is going to be really important, and we expect to hear more about that. And we expect this conference to set the tone for a new chapter in UiPath's history. The company's second in-person gathering, but the first one was last October. So really this is going to be sort of a build upon that, and many in-person events. For the first time this year, UiPath was one of the first to bring back its physical event, but we expect it to be bigger than what was at the Bellagio, and a lot of people were concerned about traveling. Although UiPath got a lot of customers there, but I think they're going to really up the game in terms of attendance this year. And really, that comparison is unfair because UiPath, again, it was sort of the middle of COVID last year. But anyway, we expect this new operations and go-to-market oriented focus from co-CEO, Rob Enslin, and new sales management, we're going to be, you know, hearing from them. And the so-called adult supervision has really been lacking at UiPath, historically. Daniel Dines will no doubt continue to have a big presence at the event and at the company. He's not a figurehead by any means. He's got a deep understanding of the product and the market and we'll be interviewing both Daniel and Rob Enslin on theCUBE to find out how they see the future. So tune in next week, or if you're in Las Vegas, definitely stop by theCUBE. If you're not go to thecube.net, you'll be able to watch all of our coverage. Okay, we're going to leave it there today. I want to thank Chip Simonton again for his input to today's episode. Thanks to Alex Morrison who's on production and manages our podcasts. Ken Schiffman, as well, from our Boston office, our Boston studio. Kristen Martin, and Cheryl Knight, they helped get the word out on social media and in our newsletters. And Rob Hof is our editor in chief over at SiliconANGLE that does some great editing. Thanks all. Remember, these episodes are all available as podcasts wherever you listen. All you got to do is search Breaking Analysis Podcasts. I publish each week on wikibon.com and siliconangle.com, and you could email me at david.vellante@siliconangle.com or DM me @dvellante. If you got anything interesting, I'll respond. If not, please keep trying, or comment on my LinkedIn post and 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 time on Breaking Analysis. (gentle techno music)