In-memory databases have yet to make much progress selling to Internet companies. In fact, only a handful of vendors, including Angara E-Commerce Services, Polyhedra, and TimesTen, sell in-memory databases to Web companies.

The relational database vendors show little sign of stepping into the in-memory market. They do, however, agree the demand for rapid data delivery will greatly increase as customization and personalization spread through the Web. Oracle is focusing on dynamic caching, which relies on sophisticated algorithms to tell the database what information to leave in cache and what to swap out. Microsoft originally had plans to include in-memory database capability in Windows 2000, but Garth Fort, lead product manager on application center server for Windows 2000, says Microsoft dropped its in-memory database because it increased performance only three times faster than local caching. Fort says developers expected a tenfold gain from lab tests. "You don't know what real-world performance will be until you try it," he says.

Hilwa says smaller vendors face a tough battle getting noticed among the relational database companies, despite the technical advantages of in-memory databases. But though they are new to the Internet scene, these vendors are already claiming some prominent Web sites as customers. TimesTen counts MarketWatch.com, PointCast, and Yahoo among its customers.

Pricing for in-memory databases varies. Polyhedra charges $12,000 per developer license and provides technical development and integration support for 20% of license fees. It sells its source code for $50,000. TimesTen software is priced from $20,000 to $100,000, depending on the size of the database. Most in-memory databases operate on several Unix as well as Windows NT platforms.

TimesTen CEO Jim Groff says in-memory databases found their first applications in telecommunications equipment for this era's increasingly complex voice and data networks. Companies such as Lucent Technologies and Nortel Networks embedded their own in-memory databases into devices for rapidly locating cell phones in a network, verifying calling-card numbers, or calculating the appropriate calling rate for a given customer. TimesTen, in fact, is a spin-off from Hewlett-Packard telecom computing operations.

Other telecom equipment makers with shallower pockets are profiting from the development of third-party in-memory databases. Bridgewater Systems Corp. is using TimesTen's database in its Dynamic Policy product for managing IP network user policies.

Parham Momtahan, director of research and development for Bridgewater Systems, says buying such a product was a boon to his small company. "We would have been using up a lot of company resources we would rather use elsewhere in trying to build our own in-memory database," Momtahan says. "This stuff is cutting-edge."

In-memory database technology could prove a significant ally to companies hoping to integrate complex personalization into their Web services. SmarterKids. com Inc., a leading online educational store for parents with children 3 to 14 years old, uses Microsoft's Site Server in conjunction with a SQL database and disk caching for managing its Web service. But managers at the Needham, Mass., company realize SmarterKids.com needs to do more Web-page customization to stay ahead of the competition. And as its customer base grows, it will need better performance in delivering real-time data in response to dynamic queries.

The IT staff is considering in-memory databases. "We're looking at all of our options," says Richard Viard, senior VP of product development. "In-memory databases are certainly something we'll look at, since we think caching may not be able to meet all our ultimate needs for personalization."

return to page 1

Photo of Viard by Brian Smith