Pentaho today announced a new OLAP viewer, called Pentaho Analyzer Enterprise Edition, based on LucidEra’s ClearView component.
This is great news for Pentaho customers, the community, and the BI world at large. While Pentaho Analysis (Mondrian) is one of its strongest components, the current OLAP viewer (based on JPivot) has been one of its weakest.
The new viewer puts Pentaho at the top of the heap, in competition with best-of-breed OLAP viewers. It is designed to be intuitive for business users (yes, those people who don’t speak MDX!), is built using the latest web technologies, and integrates seamlessly with Mondrian and the rest of the Pentaho suite.
It is going to revolutionize the experience of using OLAP within the Pentaho suite.
Naturally, there are concerns. First, the new viewer is only part of Pentaho’s Enterprise Edition (EE) suite. If Pentaho is committed to open source BI, why not release it open source? Second, what will happen to Pentaho Analysis Tool (PAT), the successor to JPivot being developed by the Pentaho community? I’d like to take the opportunity to answer these concerns, because I think this is news that everyone should be celebrating.
Why is the new Analyzer not open source?
There’s been a lot of talk about open source business models, ‘open core’, good and evil, and all that. Releasing ClearView as part of Enterprise Edition is perfectly in sync with Pentaho’s business model and with my intuitions about what makes sense for open source. Here’s my rationale.
If you release a piece of software open source out of sheer, ‘I love the world!’ altruism, you won’t necessarily see much benefit. Pentaho is a for-profit business, and they are savvy about leveraging the benefits of open source software. And let’s not kid ourselves, there are considerable downsides to releasing something open source. Your competitors can pick up the software and incorporate your hard work into their suite. And your customers may decide that the free version is so good that they aren’t going to give you any of their money.
Open source allows you to bring a component to a wider audience, an audience that will test, document and improve the component, and will support each other on the forums. Only the Community Edition (CE) components get that boost. Therefore, Pentaho’s strategy is to release the core functionality in CE. That means the high-performance core of the system, the code paths that get run trillions of times an hour, and that means all the components that are necessary to build a functional and useful BI application.
In particular, people ask me whether there is a high-performance ‘Mondrian on steroids’ in EE. No there isn’t. None of us want to maintain alternative code-paths, because the extra complexity would slow down future development. If I were to create a performance optimization in EE, the community would probably replicate that optimization in CE within a few weeks. Improving the core Mondrian system for everyone brings more people into the community, and that brings more people to EE.
And by the way, this doesn’t just apply to the Pentaho Analysis part of the suite. Pentaho adds major new functionality to the suite each release, and most of that goes into open source components.
So, what’s left to go into EE? Bells and whistles, things that make the product easier to use, easier to manage, and things that make your boss want to reach for his or her checkbook. And of course support, releases that are certified and indemnified, and more regular. I don’t think that’s a bad deal, however you look at it.
It also helps if the components are delivered under a business-friendly license like LGPL or EPL. Otherwise you will not attract contributions from OEM vendors, who are the companies with the skills to extend components as complex as Mondrian or Pentaho Data Integration (Kettle). Once again, Pentaho is taking a risk by using business-friendly licenses, because there is always a chance that Pentaho’s competitors will scoop up the fruits of its labors. (As in fact they do.)
But Pentaho’s faith in the open source process pays off. ClearView is proof of that. If Mondrian had not been available under a business-friendly open source license, LucidEra would probably have written it on top of another vendor’s engine, and Pentaho would not have been able to use it. Incidentally, LucidEra has contributed many important enhancements to Mondrian in areas of both performance and functionality over the past three years. This has improved Mondrian for everyone, and we know that ClearView performs very well against Mondrian.
What will happen to PAT?
To restate what I said above, there is a network effect when you make a component open source. The more people that use a component, the more people are going to contribute to it. We want as many people to use Mondrian as possible, and in particular we want the right people to use it (the people who are going to make major improvements).
So, for Mondrian’s continuing health as an open source component, we need the Community Edition of Mondrian to be good enough to build business applications on. For that, we need to make PAT successful.
I personally have been laying the ground work for PAT for a number of years. I spearheaded the olap4j API, knowing that the community would be more likely to write the next generation OLAP viewer if it was guaranteed to be portable across OLAP engines. Then I kicked off the halogen project, a collaboration between Pentaho developers and the community to build a viewer using olap4j and GWT. Pentaho developers contributed code and user interface design to that project, even working in their spare time when the current Pentaho sprint used up all of their ‘official’ cycles. And the PAT project used the halogen code, and the knowledge of the halogen developers, as a starting point.
It’s not healthy to have too close a relationship between an OLAP server and viewer. There should always be room for competition, an opportunity to use a new viewer or (gasp!) different OLAP server if the ‘standard’ one isn’t ideal. I created olap4j with competition in mind, and the experiment seems to be working: PAT can run against Mondrian’s native interface, Mondrian’s XMLA server, and against SQL Server Analysis Services via XMLA.
I want to make it easier to build alternative front-ends on top of olap4j, so I have been encouraging PAT developers to contribute to olap4j’s query model and library of transforms. I would like to see Analyzer move to olap4j internally (it currently uses Mondrian’s native API), and perhaps migrate some of the logic in Analyzer to olap4j so that we can share the costs of maintaining it with the community.
Lastly, as I realized at the recent community meetup in Barcelona, we have a great team, and we need to harness their energy. After a beer or two with PAT developers Tom and Paul, some inspiring demos from Pedro and Daniel, we hatched ideas of incorporating spark lines and writeback into PAT, and I’m sure the ideas will keep on flowing. With this much inspiration and hard work coming from the community, how can we possibly fail?