When the news broke last week about Oracle’s intent to buy Sun Microsystems, my thoughts turned to the Sun design and verification engineers I’ve spoken to in recent years. Will Oracle, a newcomer to the world of EDA and chip design, keep that team?
The outcome depends on two questions – Oracle’s plans for the Sparc architecture, and Oracle’s views about keeping hardware design in-house. I think it’s in Oracle’s best interests to keep Sparc and keep the team.
From all indications, Oracle does intend to keep Sun’s hardware business. A FAQ document at the Oracle web site states that “Oracle plans to grow the Sun hardware business after the closing” and notes that “key to this strategy will be our plans to develop software-optimized hardware that integrates all of the enterprise components: hardware, database, middleware, and applications.” (Interestingly, Oracle entered the hardware business in September 2008, when it announced two servers developed in conjunction with Hewlett-Packard, a company it will now apparently compete with).
The server business is tough, and Sun’s differentiation has rested with its Sparc processors. Will Oracle continue Sparc development? A recent EE Times analysis article noted a few of the downsides:
As also noted in that article, however, it would take a long time to wind down Sparc, and Sun has made considerable investments in its next-generation Niagara and Rock processors. Oracle should think long and hard before throwing that investment away. Keeping Sparc, and keeping Sun’s processor expertise, might be the best way to develop highly differentiated machines that are optimized for running Oracle software.
So what about keeping Sparc, but outsourcing some or all of the chip development work? In my view, that’s not a good idea. Consider:
It is certainly true that the systems business is becoming more software-centric. However, Sun’s hardware design expertise is part of the core competence of the company, just like Java and Solaris. I hope Oracle recognizes that.
These are excellent examples of why Oracle needs both hardware and software expertise to build the “software-optimized hardware” that is its stated goal. With the advanced research work already underway by Sun, it is possible that Oracle could break new ground with processor and server technology.
I think your arguments to hold on to the microprocessor group make sense. I would just like to add a few more insights into the need to keep the microprocessor work ongoing, albeit with a merger of disparate groups into a single unified division.
1. Hardware transactional memory implemented in Rock will boost database kernel performance. This would allow BIDW installations of Oracle to surpass competition in performance if software development at compiler, OS and kernel levels take advantage of atomic transactions.
2. Sun-TSMC alliance along with Sun Labs work on asynchronous design and proximity interconnect represents a way to feed bandwidth hungry server microprocessors for years to come if a unified engineering team can be forged. This gives the company a roadmap of engineering effort to project to the market with prioritized timelines for implementation of different technology features all the way upto to the system and software level.