We all like reports.  Reports that include graphs and pie charts are even better!  One thing we don't always consider is how fresh the data in we are looking at is?  In a typical Business Intelligence scenario, the data we can access is normally already a day old.  For long-term planning this is probably acceptable, but nowadays is day old data really enough to be competitive?  What if manufacturing efficiency suddenly drops in your factory or your online sales suddenly boom and threaten your stoke levels?  Do you really want to wait until tomorrow to find that our?  SAP don’t think so.

SAP HANA was developed to plug these gaps in reporting (as well as other ventures in the future).  HANA stands for "High performance ANalytic Appliance".  It uses custom In-Memory computing techniques to offer extremely high query performance.  Unlike BWA, HANA supports SQL and MDX giving it far more flexibility.  However, like BWA, HANA is an appliance, meaning it can only be ordered from and installed by specialist partners like Centiq.

( 2 Votes )

With today's news, IBM is expanding its portfolio and furthering its investments in information and analytics with:

( 1 Vote )
March 2010 was the last month before a number of changes to the penalty and enforcement rules are expected to the Data protection act, (including custodial sentences and far heftier fines), and it was local government and Finance/Insurance houses that came out badly. With 3  reported breaches  to each industry it was an unwanted draw, although hospital trusts will be happy to have  avoided recognition this month. What is most interesting however is the range of risks exposed. We had the usual lost Laptops and memory sticks but we also had wider process failings and a return of the age old "lost tape"

Concerning the process failing I have long advocated businesses reviewing how information is processed and managed through an organisation and generating a process map/ information flow policy.

( 2 Votes )

Having checked out an implementation of TSM for Sharepoint, I was surprised to see that backup data was being retained for longer periods than set in the backup plan. I checked the usual places (Server copygroups, expiration processing, etc) but everything seemed in order. I then turned to google and user groups and after many searches I finally stumbled across an answer to the problem. 

This can be caused by two different TSM server settings for the DocAve node.
1.  The node does not have Del Backup set to Yes
2.  The node's txngroupmax is too low Diagnostics:
1. Check the following:
 Query Node F=D for the node in question and ensure the following is set :
      Backup Delete Allowed: Yes

2. Check the actlog for the following
ANR0445W Protocol error on session 1115630 for node nodename (DocAve) - maximum group transaction size exceeded. (SESSION: 1115630) In the case where the node's Backup Delete Allowed is set to No, update the node so that it is set to Yes. In the case where you are getting the delete errors due to maximum group transaction size exceeded, then you need to update the node's txngroupmax.

During a DocAve backup, the data is segmented into 50mb chunks. This is stored individually on TSM as an object. Because DocAve uses the TSM API, the deletion of the old data is done as a single transaction. If the number of objects it is trying to delete is greater than txngroupmax, then the deletion will fail.

( 1 Vote )
I've just read with interest the following post by Jerome Wendt at the Analysts DCIG http://symantec.dciginc.com/2010/03/data-insight-seeks-to-answer.html

My first thought on this was "what a useful tool", but then started to question myself. Firstly it maps user access to data. When I run our Unstructured Data Analysis tool over client systems I regularly find 80%+ of data is inactive and hasn't been used or modified since creation or migration so any automated process is going to miss these large chunks. My next concern is that whilst a technically sophisticated product this is another example of IT giving leading answers to business decisions. Strong corporate information management is about IT assisting a business unit get rid of the '000s of spreadsheets stored and implement a better business process, not assume the process isn't broken. I agree that data ownership is a significant problem and many are shying away from it. I also think the product will have some success as it offers a way to mask the underlying issue, an unfortunate and costly trend in modern data management, however IMO the answer is to process map organisational data flows from the department down not the data up. An analogy, a vet (IT) driving round a safari park would see whether the animals are well or not but  have to assume they are all in the right place. Only the keepers (depts) would really know.


Sample of our UDA output
http://www.centiq.co.uk/attachments/101_data-profiling-sample-report.pdf

For more information read more of our blogs

( 3 Votes )
The Garage and Loft is full of boxes of stuff you don't use or need. So whats the first thing you do?  That's right call the real estate agent and move house. Or maybe not. If you did this your friends and neighbours would think you had gone mad, you would be permanently wasting money on removals men, legal fees, taxes etc. and not spending it on stuff that makes your life easier, more enjoyable, or both. So why do businesses accept it in IT systems?

( 1 Vote )
A  web posting for a cloud/remote backup provider asked the question “is a 30 day retention policy sufficient?” and suggested that a much longer  retention policy was the way to go to ensure availability of data, whether it be 60 or 90 days or even longer. I challenge this question and believe that for many 30 days retention is excessive.

Why?

( 1 Vote )
When looking at content management system it is essential to be clear on what you are looking to gain . is it really Content Management or  is Workflow Management or even full Business Process Management part of the vision or  already "configured" in the enterprise? Some historically competent content management systems have next to no workflow support and modern ones may require 3rd party add-ons to automate classification or retention/compliance/deletion policies. Be as granular as you can in the matrix/scorecard decision process being used as this should allow you to differentiate functionality and the value to your organisation of having/not having the differentiators between vendors. At one end you could end up with a base Sharepoint installation and out of the box workflow to the other end of the scale with a Isis Papyrus or Filenet p8 with all the whistles and database archive and MDM but critically you will know the value of that decision not just its cost. The next challenge is to accurately document the current position. Simply porting a poorly defined and understood file system will end up in a poorly defined and confusing content management system.

With restrictions under the Data protection Act 1998 limiting the cross bordering of personal data Forrester have released a map to highlight individual country legislation and compliance with EU adequacy tests. see http://www.forrester.com/cloudprivacyheatmap

It is also worth checking out the ICO website as it clarifies the US position, (which is only deemed adequate if the recieving company has signed up to the Safe Harbor Scheme

Informatica's announcement in the India online Press  (CIOL)  of the industry first Cloud based archiving solution has got me thinking.