When we went down to Orlando last fall to attend the Gartner Summit on Complex Event Processing, we went with eyes wide open. We were new to the domain of CEP, and one our missions was to try to pick a vendor for the CEP engine that would drive our efforts to produce a major CEP system for our Equities business.
There were a bunch of event-processing systems that were not under consideration because it seemed that they had moved into the strictly vertical area of Algo Trading. These CEP systems included Truviso and Skylar. We needed a general-purpose CEP system, and we wanted to only consider systems that still had a generalist product. An exception to this rule was Aleri, a company who had just come out with a Liquidity Management System as a separate product. We thought that Aleri would still keep its focus on the core CEP engine, so it warranted inclusion of our evaluation.
Apama fell into the Algo trading vertical, but Apama still has a general purpose CEP engine. However, when we tried to evaluate Apama, we were told that we had to go through the dog-and-pony marketing show, something that we did not want to do. I am not sure if this requirement was brought on by the purchase of Apama by Progress Software, a company who I think of as being Computer Associates Lite. I was also told about some interesting experiences between Apama and a major bank by a former colleague of mine whose opinion I trust, and this also influenced by decision to evaluate Apama. This was unfortunate, as I happen to side more with Apama on the whole EPL vs Stream SQL debate.
This left four systems: Streambase, Coral8, Esper, and Aleri.
Coral8 had always been the front-runner, mostly due to recommendations by some former colleagues who were at Merrill Lynch. I had always liked the “vibe” surrounding Coral8, and their openness at giving out eval copies of their software.
Readers of my blog know that I had strong negative opinions about Streambase because of the aggressiveness of their marketing department, an opinion which was shared by a lot of people out there. Nevertheless, their new CEO, Chris Risley, contacted me personally and told me that he had addressed my concerns. After Chris and Richard Tibbetts came down to NYC to meet with me, we decided to include Streambase in the evaluation.
I really wanted to try Esper, but there were a few things that worked against them. The primary factor was that the .NET version, NEsper, was something that was developed by the hard-working Aaron Crackajaxx for his business needs, and did not seem to be part of the mainline Esper product line. We are a .NET shop here, and we needed a product that supported .NET as a first-class citizen. If Aaron decided to become disinterested in Nesper, or if he moved on to another company, then where would we be? We also preferred a product that had an entire ecosystem built around it. So, we passed on Esper. However, Esper is still very much on my radar screen, and I am interested to see how Thomas continues to develop the company and the product.
We spent a good deal of time evaluating Aleri, and most of these experiences were detailed in past entries in this blog. We really wanted to see Aleri succeed, as they were a local company, staffed with a lot of very smart and gentile ex Bell Lab-ers. However, we felt that their product was not ready for us, mostly because of what I called the “spit and polish” issues. I won’t rehash the details now, but if you are interested, please go back and read the old entries in this blog. The areas that needed improvement in the Aleri product were the Aleri Studio, the documentation, and the integration of external data sources.
I met a good deal with Don DeLoach, the CEO of Aleri, and the one positive that will come from my rejection of Aleri is a renewed focus by Aleri on the aesthetics of their product. You can already see these efforts by reading the new Aleri Blog. From what Don had told me a few months ago, their 3.0 product will start to focus on easier integration of external data sources, and will have much improved documentation. I look forward to seeing their efforts come into fruition.
Coral8 was always the front-runner in our evaluation. Their engine is written in C++. They had a decent .NET SDK that let you build out-of-process adapters in C#, and also let you interact with the internals of the Coral8 engine. Their documentation was good, although a bit obtuse at times, and the documentation was backed up by a ton of whitepapers that are available on their website. Their Coral8 Studio gives you a source code view of development, and the GUI part of the Studio is updated after every compile of the source. The CEO of the company was the person who created Crystal Reports, and knows what it takes to build a software company. But, most of all, their CTO and President interacted with us all of the time, and was extremely receptive to our ideas on improving his product. I like when a CTO and the pre-sales engineer send me mail on a Sunday morning!
Streambase was a strong contender. They had some great features in the product that Coral8 has only just come out with (ie: windows that are bucketed by column value). Their GUI is very strong, and their documentation and tutorials are first class. However, I have to say that the interest that Coral8 has shown in our success, and the availability of their CTO was what tipped the odds in Coral8’s favor.
By now, you must be saying to yourself “Where’s the meat?” Didn’t we try to soak and stress the various engines? Didn’t we have an OPRA feed running into the engines in an effort to break them? Didn’t we monitor the use of the CPU and other computing resources? Well … no. To tell you the truth, we were relying on STAC Research to try to do that job for us. STAC is only now just starting to get up to speed in the CEP world, and we will be monitoring their efforts in this space. The general feeling is that most of these CEP engines perform in roughly the same manner, and if one of the CEP engines is 5% faster than Coral8, it is not going to sway our decision, since we are not that concerned right now with super low latency. We are more concerned with the intangibles; responsiveness of the support organization, evolution of the product (and our input into the roadmap), support for .NET as a first-class citizen, stability of the company, etc.
Despite choosing Coral8, we have been careful in our architecture to abstract the specific CEP engine, and no external system will know that Coral8 is driving our CEP system. In the same way that CEP engines have abstracted datasources by using pluggable adapters, we have abstracted the CEP engine. Yes, we have chosen Coral8, and so far, we are satisfied by our choice. But, we are also keeping our eyes open for how the other products evolve in the world of Complex Event Processing.
©2008 Marc Adler - All Rights Reserved