Comments for Marco on CEP

Comment on Vendors by Marco

Marco — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 19:17:23 +0000

Well… they use many of the right CEP buzzwords for sure…

Comment on Vendors by SDFusion

SDFusion — Wed, 11 Jan 2012 17:26:15 +0000

Would Cogility be considered a CEP vendor? If so how do they compare with the rest in the files?

Comment on Types of CEP – From StreamInsight by Marco

Marco — Wed, 22 Jun 2011 21:09:30 +0000

A algorithm which is driven by a stream of events is one of the main types I commonly classify CEP solutions into. For example computing an average using an attribute in the events. Commonly these data driven algorithms compute some kind of interesting metric or value used in a decision.
In the other case you know somehow what combinations of events and their attributes are interesting to your business.

This is the operational mode. How one figures out the algorithm or event patterns is another interesting problem area.

Comment on Types of CEP – From StreamInsight by Richard Tibbetts

Richard Tibbetts — Wed, 22 Jun 2011 11:54:51 +0000

Interesting perspective. What's the distinction you draw between "running algorithms" and "looking for patterns"? Is that mathematical sophistication, which would just be a continuum, or is it something else?
A distinction I tend to draw is between discovery and operations. In discovery, someone is looking for new patterns to care about, developing new algorithms, which often combines CEP with other tools like math modeling software (e.g. Matlab, R) or historical data archives. Sometimes this is part of the development process, but often discovery is a continuous process in parallel to and continuing after development. Operations or production is when the patterns or algorithms are deployed against live data and taking actions in the real world.

Comment on Types of CEP – From StreamInsight by Marco

Marco — Wed, 22 Jun 2011 04:36:09 +0000

Another cool solution for collecting events in a distributed world might be the Akamai edge computing platform.I have not looked at the details but it sounded like something that could be used exactly for what's stated in the article above:

"event data needs to be collected from globally distributed assets or equipment such as connected cars or oil platforms"

Guess who's working with connected cars

Comment on Types of CEP – From StreamInsight by Marco

Marco — Wed, 22 Jun 2011 04:32:46 +0000

Thanks for the link. That’s indeed very good news. I saw it in my googling session but it somehow slipped through my attention filter. I suppose that it’s because just everbody are talking about cloud-something so I don’t register anything cloud related as news anymore… But yes, that’s very interesting and good news. Thanks for pointing it out!

Comment on Types of CEP – From StreamInsight by Johng

Johng — Tue, 21 Jun 2011 21:01:23 +0000

I'd say this was pretty big news….

http://sqlblog.com/blogs/stream_insight/archive/2011/05/24/streaminsight-project-codename-austin.aspx

Comment on On Event Models by Marco

Marco — Wed, 08 Jun 2011 20:46:31 +0000

Well, my intention was not at all to mix up events and the languages used to process them...

attribute-value pair type of events are just one type of events. There are more complex semantics that might be required and more complex data structures needed for the payload of data.

Comment on On Event Models by Marco

Marco — Tue, 07 Jun 2011 07:57:23 +0000

Hey Marco, thanks for your quick answer. I am, however, still a bit confused about things here:

Maybe I’m just not understanding it correctly, but it seems to me that you are mixing up two things: Event representation and query language (accessing events).

In my world, events are generally to be seen as attribute-value pairs. Whether they are queried by an SQL based language such as CQL or by specifying restrictions on attributes similar to content-based publish/subscribe system does not seem to make any difference here. For the CEP system the way a user issues a query should not make any difference, it is just a matter of representation which one should be able to translate into the respective other.

The interesting part is, whether we have other implicit restrictions here. E.g. if you speak of SQL world events, do you mean that there has to be a static schema that is to be known in advance? Then, however, I don’t get the part of this approach being more flexible, because I’d suppose it would be the other way round. Or what are the other differences concerning the processing models of the two engines?

Kind regards
Marco

Comment on On Event Models by Marco

Marco — Tue, 07 Jun 2011 04:50:02 +0000

The biggest difference seems to be in the semantics. The StreamBase events are a bit more flexible where the user can assign his own semantics to the event and the ruleCore event semantics are a bit more fixed.