What was good was just the text that explained that they had many data 'silos' and wanted to get many analyzes that used data from multiple silos. The good news was that they understood what was in the silos, i.e., likely had meaningful descriptions of the data base 'schemas'.

So, here's a 'simple' description in just a few words: On the left they had a lot of silos, and on the right they had a lot of users who needed analyzes. Then they wanted to put a computer-based system in the middle to ease the work of satisfying the users. Okay; at times there can be a point to such an intermediate system.

An example is IBM's Resource Object Data Manager (RODM), and the start-up Kabira has at least some of the functionality, but in the case of RODM the reasons were (A) the systems on the left were not necessarily data bases but any systems, e.g., in a server farm or network, that needed to be 'managed', (B) the system in the middle could 'cache' data from systems on the left and, thus, reduce query loads on those systems from applications on the right, (C) the system in the middle could let the systems on the right 'subscribe' to changes in the data on the left and, thus, reduce 'polling' looking for such changes, and most important (D) the system in the middle could present to the systems on the right a 'virtual' view of the systems on the left but with security, locking, transactional integrity, deadlock detection, and automatic deadlock resolution, at times important for systems management applications (on the right). Or, for (D), can have many independently developed applications on the right that still do not 'get in each other's way' in their interactions with the systems on the left. When want such functionality, then may want the system in the middle. But if can't point to some such important functionality, then don't need the system in the middle.

Here are some problems with the figure and its description:

(1) They overdid the undefined TLAs, that is, three letter acronyms.

(2) They omitted any solid reason for the intermediate system. That is, it's easy enough for any PC to do a data base query of any data base the PC can get to with connectivity and privileges, e.g., passwords. So, without more explanation, all that is needed in the middle is just a communications network, e.g., a LAN or the Internet. For more, the data base systems could have some stored procedures or triggers that helped the applications.

(3) They swept under the rug what is likely the biggest challenge — doing the applications software that goes from the data to the results the users need. They just said "decision support", and from the explanations they gave that is the 800 pound gorilla in the room, not getting the data from the silos.

E.g., if they are a 'job shop' then they may have a job scheduling problem to (1) let the sales staff rapidly give time and cost estimates to prospective customers, (2) have the shop get the work done on time, and (3) not have wasted motion in the shop. While this problem is real, it is well known to be NP-complete — i.e., a gorilla.