Off Topic: open source databases
in [Oracle]
|
From: Steve Howard on 26 May 2010 13:14 On May 26, 10:56 am, Mladen Gogala <n...(a)email.here.invalid> wrote: > I guess this is a legitimate topic now that MySQL is essentially an > Oracle product, too. My question, however, is not devoted to MySQL or any > other specific OSS database. I am just interested in what OSS databases > are mostly used in data centers, in addition to Oracle and why? > Specifically about MySQL, did the fact that Oracle Corp. now owns it, > lessen its appeal or even increase it? I must confess that I expected to > see a massive exodus from MySQL which did not materialize. I confess that > my understanding of the world may not be entirely correct and I will even > allow the possibility that the Earth is not flat, but this I do not > understand. > > --http://mgogala.byethost5.com We started implementing MySQL databases in mid 2007, and the trend has been constant since then. Our largest product to be released is going to be using MySQL sharding with a database agnostic front end (Let the insluts start flying). A lot of the complaints that used to be levied against MySQL just aren't true anymore, especially with InnoDB. There are some things it just can't do, and my guess is never will (advanced security features, flashback, etc.), but for some that is OK. Oracle still drives our big iron, but for how long? No clue. I can say I would be shocked to be receiving a paycheck in ten years for what I currently do. I am not a babysitter, I actively blog, test, learn new stuff, etc., it's just that I think Oracle's day as a $50K per CPU white knight has come and gone. It's replacement in the world? I would guess MySQL, based on Oracle Corp.'s ownership if nothing else.
From: Mladen Gogala on 26 May 2010 21:34 On Wed, 26 May 2010 10:14:40 -0700, Steve Howard wrote: > It's replacement in the world? I would guess MySQL, based on Oracle > Corp.'s ownership if nothing else. Hmmm, that doesn't compute, from my point of view. That is precisely why I opened this topic. Why would a huge corporation suddenly abandon its main cash cow in favor of a freebie? Slowly killing the freebie seems more likely to me, now that Oracle Corp. owns it. I am not sure as to why people are not trying to run away from MySQL, but they obviously are not. -- http://mgogala.byethost5.com
From: galen_boyer on 26 May 2010 23:46 Mladen Gogala <gogala.mladen(a)gmail.com> writes: > On Wed, 26 May 2010 10:14:40 -0700, Steve Howard wrote: > > >> It's replacement in the world? I would guess MySQL, based on Oracle >> Corp.'s ownership if nothing else. > > Hmmm, that doesn't compute, from my point of view. That is precisely why > I opened this topic. Why would a huge corporation suddenly abandon its > main cash cow in favor of a freebie? Slowly killing the freebie seems > more likely to me, now that Oracle Corp. owns it. I am not sure as to why > people are not trying to run away from MySQL, but they obviously are not. I don't think Oracle owns it. Nobody can "own" open source. They bought off the main braintrust and set up agreements so those guys wouldn't start up again. But, the way I understand it, anybody could continue development on MySql. -- Galen Boyer --- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: news(a)netfront.net ---
From: Mladen Gogala on 27 May 2010 02:41 On Wed, 26 May 2010 23:46:29 -0400, galen_boyer wrote: > Mladen Gogala <gogala.mladen(a)gmail.com> writes: > >> On Wed, 26 May 2010 10:14:40 -0700, Steve Howard wrote: >> >> >>> It's replacement in the world? I would guess MySQL, based on Oracle >>> Corp.'s ownership if nothing else. >> >> Hmmm, that doesn't compute, from my point of view. That is precisely >> why I opened this topic. Why would a huge corporation suddenly abandon >> its main cash cow in favor of a freebie? Slowly killing the freebie >> seems more likely to me, now that Oracle Corp. owns it. I am not sure >> as to why people are not trying to run away from MySQL, but they >> obviously are not. > > I don't think Oracle owns it. Nobody can "own" open source. They > bought off the main braintrust and set up agreements so those guys > wouldn't start up again. > > But, the way I understand it, anybody could continue development on > MySql. The appeal of MySQL was partly a dual licensing mode: open source server that everybody was using, mainly for testing and a closed source, enterprise version. The latter is owned by Oracle. If you were paying maintenance fee to MySQL Corp., you are now paying the license fees to Oracle Corp. As for the open source version, there are actually 3 of those: one still maintained by Oracle Corp., and yes, you are right, everybody can contribute to that project, something called MariaDB and produced by Monty Widenius, and another something, called Drizzle, produced by the guys who worked on MySQL while it was owned by SUN Microsystems. Problems with MySQL were numerous, the most serious in my eyes was lack of the hot backup. Essentially, the only form of backup was a SQL dump, akin to export/import utilities. Also, there was no upgrade utility to upgrade between versions. The only thing that I ever really used MySQL for was as a plug in replacement for *10 ("times ten") because *10 had no decent ODBC driver version 3.1 and some of the Windows reporting utilities were adamantly refusing to work with *10 because of that. MySQL to the rescue, it supported so called "memory engine", which you could specify on the table basis. Basically, I would write a Perl script that would do a lot of "GROUP BY" things in Oracle, summarize the results and insert them into MySQL in-memory tables. Business users with shiny clickety-click thingys like Crystal Reports and Business Objects would use MySQL ODBC driver to connect and be happy as clams. There is a network monitoring software, called Cacti, which used to work with MySQL. I tested the tool and ditched it because it used to hang the underlying MySQL database with more than 10 devices to monitor. As I was working for a telco at that time, the network devices to monitor numbered in hundreds. The problem was the fact that the back-end scripts, running from crontab were having locking problems if used all at once. The problems stopped when I replaced MySQL with Oracle XE, which was perfectly sufficient for this purpose. Alas, MySQL was deeply integrated with Cacti and the product was useless. I haven't done anything with Cacti for the last 2 years so I don't know whether this has changed and whether there is a native Oracle port. I very much doubt that Oracle Corp. will devote serious resources needed to make the closed source version better and I doubt that they will integrate serious features like backup, upgrade or logical standby into MySQL. In my opinion, MySQL fell under the influence of the dark side and is pretty much done for. -- http://mgogala.byethost5.com
From: Steve Howard on 27 May 2010 07:52
On May 26, 9:34 pm, Mladen Gogala <gogala.mla...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, 26 May 2010 10:14:40 -0700, Steve Howard wrote: > > It's replacement in the world? I would guess MySQL, based on Oracle > > Corp.'s ownership if nothing else. > > Hmmm, that doesn't compute, from my point of view. That is precisely why > I opened this topic. Why would a huge corporation suddenly abandon its > main cash cow in favor of a freebie? Slowly killing the freebie seems > more likely to me, now that Oracle Corp. owns it. I am not sure as to why > people are not trying to run away from MySQL, but they obviously are not. > > --http://mgogala.byethost5.com I honestly think that over the longer run, Oracle is trying to figure out how to make money from software as a service, rather than charging for it as a product. So yes, they don't *own* it from a practical standpoint, as Galen noted. However, they will support it and back it with whatever it needs (including the read consistent model they provided it via InnoDB a few years ago). In the process, they may discover how to make money from it without charging for the software, which I *hope* makes it over the to the flagship RDBMS. As Monty Widenius has already kind of done, someone will just fork the code if they try to kill it, as it is already in the wild. |