Re: distributed storage via consistent hashing

Date view Thread view Subject view Author view

From: Adam Rifkin (adam@KnowNow.com)
Date: Fri Dec 29 2000 - 01:59:48 PST

I wrote:
> > Rohit says that someone's going to earn a PhD applying to RAID storage
> > the Consistent Hash mathematics:
> > http://theory.lcs.mit.edu/~karger/Papers/Talks/Hash/index.htm
> > Hey, maybe Caltech will let me come back and finish my degree. :)

Ed responded:
> Adam & Rohit, not only has this been done to RAID and distributed
> storage, but I thought you and I had talked about it! ;-)

Whew, good thing I didn't quit my day job. :)

Now to change the topic completely, I just realized that to be one of
the Software Magazine's Top 500 Business Software Companies, one only
needs annual revenues in excess of $1.6 million:

    http://www.softwaremag.com/SW500_2000/index.cfm?StartRow=451&RowsPer=50&BusCat_Search=&PrimBus_Search=&PrimBusCat_Search=&RankSort=ASC&CompSort=

Total revenues of the 500 companies is $208 billion. Nice chunk of change.
To be in the Top 10 requires annual revenues in excess of $5 billion:

    http://www.softwaremag.com/SW500_2000/index.cfm

Here are the Top 10 as of June 2000:

  1. IBM, $44.9b
  2. Microsoft, $21.5b
  3. PricewaterhouseCoopers, $17.3b
  4. Oracle, $9.3b
  5. Andersen Consulting, $8.9b
  6. Hewlett-Packard, $8.7b
  7. Compaq, $7.8b
  8. Computer Associates, $6.3b
  9. Hitachi, $5.9b
 10. SAP, $5.1b

Some other notables:

 11. Sun, $3.2b
 12. Bull Worldwide, $3.1b
 13. Compuware, $2.1b
 15. BMC, $1.6b
 16. EMC, $1.6b
 18. Peoplesoft, $1.4b
 19. Novell, $1.3b
 25. SAS, $1.0b
 26. Adobe, $1.0b
 27. Apple, $977m
 29. Sybase, $872m
 30. Informix, $872m
 32. Autodesk, $820m
 34. Siebel, $791m
 37. Symantec, $728m
 38. Network Associates, $683m
 42. CTP, $628m
 45. Veritas, $596m
 46. i2, $571m
 49. Rational, $517m
 50. Mentor Graphics, $511m
 51. MarchFirst, $481m
 52. BEA Systems, $464m
 55. Citrix, $403m
 61. Lernout & Hauspie, $344m
 65. FileNet, $331m
 72. Sapient, $277m
 74. Epicor, $258m
 75. Corel, $243m
 76. Business Objects, $242m
 78. Clarify, $231m
 79. Remedy, $229m
 83. Peregrine, $223m
 84. Macromedia, $222m
 85. Check Point, $220m
 93. Hummingbird, $190m
 94. Mercury Interactive, $188m
 98. Infosys, $176m
 99. Inprise, $175m
100. Dendrite, $173m
101. Wind River, $171m
102. Razorfish, $170m
103. Great Plains, $163m
106. Scient, $156m
107. Harbinger, $156m
108. Manugistics, $152m
109. MicroStrategy, $151m
121. NEON, $126m
122. RSA, $125m
124. Datastream, $119m
125. Brio, $118m
126. Jack Henry, $116m
129. BroadVision, $116m
131. AXENT, $113m
134. Open Text, $107m
135. Iona, $105m
137. Advent, $102m
138. Concentrex, $100m
139. Inktomi, $99m
140. Mercator, $99m
141. Intraware, $97m
142. TIBCO, $96m
146. FileMaker, $94m
147. TenFold, $92m
149. Best, $91m
150. Blackbaud, $90m
171. Digital River, $75m
173. Verity, $73m
177. Quest, $71m
192. Magic, $64m
195. Informatica, $62m
196. Viant, $61m
198. Onyx, $61m
200. Caere, $59m
206. Allaire, $55m
207. Rogue Wave, $54m
211. Level 8, $53m
222. Actuate, $47m
229. Ariba, $45m
231. Software.com, $45m
239. Red Hat, $41m
240. Descartes, $41m
243. InterWorld, $41m
246. Clarus, $38m
248. Concur, $38m
250. Unify, $37m
251. Telelogic, $37m
252. InstallShield, $37m
255. USInternetworking, $36m
259. CommerceOne, $34m
267. Spyglass, $32m
268. ScanSoft, $32m
274. Vitria, $30m
275. Calico, $30m
290. Active Software, $27m
297. NetScout, $26m
300. Breakaway, $25m
313. BackWeb, $23m
314. SilverStream, $23m
322. Puma, $21m
335. E.piphany, $19m
346. Agile, $17m
349. Apropos, $16m
352. Metrowerks, $16m
353. Bluestone, $16m
357. Net Perceptions, $15m
361. webMethods, $15m
367. Silknet, $14m
369. StarBase, $14m
371. Accrue, $13m
380. Versata, $13m
391. Blue Martini, $11m
396. Selectica, $11m
398. Broadbase, $10m
399. Rainbow, $10m
400. Ganymede, $10m
409. Netegrity, $10m
423. Saba, $8m
438. NetGenesis, $6.5m
450. TeamShare, $5.5m
500. LD I Associates, $1.6m

Among the curiously missing: Interwoven, Micromuse, CrossWorlds, Art
Technology Group, Talarian, Fiorano, Bowstreet, DataChannel, and AmIHotOrNot. :) 

----
Adam@KnowNow.Com

In contrast to the software-development paradigm of integrate-then-deploy,
Web content operates on a deploy-then-federate model.  In other words,
developers simply post their own Web pages and include hyperlinks that
connect them to other pages.  The Web's URL-based addressing system is
smart enough to handle the behind-the-scenes interconnection between
sites at the level of Web content.  That addressing system sits on top
of routers that dynamically balance network traffic loads through the
magic of TCP/IP, augmented by caches and load balancers.  Web developers
need not worry about network topologies between their servers and their
customers because the network itself is smart enough to do so.  Once you
get beyond static content and network usage levels scale beyond a
certain point, however, the Net's built-in load balancing isn't good
enough.  OpenDesign is creating a new platform that handles application-
level load-balancing automatically.  Using smart, programmable routers
that can move and execute code, policies and data, the system changes
network interconnections dynamically based on application demand, using
both edge-note (P2P) and server-based processing as appropriate.
  -- Kevin Werbach, _Release 1.0_, 19 December 2000

Date view Thread view Subject view Author view

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Dec 29 2000 - 02:05:17 PST