Whither MySQL?

Post #307,555 by drook 4/20/09 10:56:43 AM Reply	Whither MySQL? In the comments on that link: Oracle will finally be able to do what they've always wanted to: kill mysql ComputerWorld already wondering about this. http://blogs.compute..._happens_to_mysql The fear, though, is that Oracle will naturally want to channel customers toward the higher priced option. What's the incentive to continue to improve an open-source product that could compete with its flagship? -- Drew
Post #307,566 by jake123 4/20/09 1:10:20 PM Reply	Can't see the issue it's not like they compete in the same space. I'd think the logical thing for Oracle to do would be to move them towards a greater intersection of syntax so MySQL becomes the Oracle gateway drug.
Post #307,568 by beepster 4/20/09 1:18:20 PM Reply	Bigger issue Oracle runs their software in their data center on Linux x86. Wonder what happens there? I will choose a path that's clear. I will choose freewill.
Post #307,570 by jake123 4/20/09 1:29:53 PM Reply	We're solaris and oracle here though the db is not seriously key. Word here is that Oracle's Just Better On Solaris. I doubt that they'll kill Oracle Linux; better to let their customers have their choice of platform. However, I'm sure that the rumours about IBM buying Sun precipitated the move... after all, IBM's DB2 competes with Oracle, even whilst MySQL doesn't... and I'm sure that Solaris is a very important platform for them. Further, if they've done a good job with their software, if they decide to move to Solaris/Sparc in their data centre, it shouldn't be a huge issue for them to do it. Finally... there's LOTS of java in Oracle land... prolly (again) don't want to have a competing DB vendor have control of that part of their toolset. Of course, they could be stoopid and decide to kill the linux version of Oracle, but I can't think of any rational reason they'd be willing to write off that part of the market.
Post #307,571 by boxley 4/20/09 1:32:10 PM Reply	they get paid by the license so shouldnt really care if its linux or windows or solaris or anything ele
Post #307,572 by Andrew Grygus 4/20/09 1:33:54 PM Reply	Unless they're getting paid for Solaris licenses too.
Post #307,573 by boxley 4/20/09 1:57:06 PM Reply	Solaris License is free, same as Linux
Post #307,575 by beepster 4/20/09 2:31:02 PM Reply	Think word is..um...maybe jaded if Oracle runs their own on Linux..I think the "just better" thing might be overstated. Seen stats that show x86 Linux killing on a cost/performance basis...and as Oracle licenses by core...if you can run equal or better performance on fewer processors...well its pretty simple math...and not in Oracle's favor. I will choose a path that's clear. I will choose freewill.
Post #307,580 by jake123 4/20/09 3:17:56 PM Reply	Yeah, but OTOH we can't have downtime. Can't. We manage literally millions of email accounts for multiple customers in the wireless industry. Our experience is that Solaris is much much better for that than linux. So, even if we have to spend more money (and we do, just for the hardware, let alone the software costs involved) that matters a lot. Currently, I can say our downtime for the particular db is on the order of app. four minutes in the last 14 months, and as I understand it that's pretty typical over the last eight years or so of use. The cost is not the sole metric involved here... there are others and they (at the current price point) are much heavier than the money we blow on the oracle licensing.
Post #307,567 by Andrew Grygus 4/20/09 1:17:52 PM Reply	Could be more serious than that. MySQL can always fork off - but if Oracle owns Solaris, how seriously will they take continued development of Oracle on Linux?
Post #307,569 by beepster 4/20/09 1:18:56 PM Reply	Beat me by a few seconds. I will choose a path that's clear. I will choose freewill.
Post #307,608 by malraux 4/20/09 11:08:28 PM Reply	Hard to change that overnight. As I understand it, primarily Oracle development is done on Linux, then ported to the other platforms. The main problem Oracle would have in giving up Linux, however, is the x86 platform. Despite with Sun may tell its customers, Solaris X86 is not really a viable enterprise platform. And with all of those cheap, smoking fast X86 blades out there, running Oracle RAC on Linux is a very attractive proposition. Regards, -scott Welcome to Rivendell, Mr. Anderson.
Post #307,617 by boxley 4/21/09 8:03:41 AM Reply	hogwash Solaris X86 has been a viable enterprise system since its debut as Interactive Unix in 1985 or so. As good or better than linux. thanx, bill
Post #307,622 by folkert 4/21/09 9:04:38 AM Reply	Yep, keep repeating the mantra... Eventually you'll get someone to believe you. Next you'll be telling me that SCO on x86 was the cat's meow back then. Sheesh, at least we all know how well that really is. Heck x86 didn't REALLY become a good deal on Price and Processor Power until the Xeon Processors (the real Xeons (700 or 800MHz models with MBs of cache)) Before that Xenix was better.
Post #307,626 by boxley 4/21/09 10:02:32 AM Reply	Im not the evangalist on the board linux doesnt suxxors! it will eventually be used on every desktop! soon as a few bugs are worked out! Sure, and back in the day SCO was better than xenix as was Forpro on intel. Cheap was a machine at 3.5k plus 1.2k for the OS compared to 15k for an entry level apollo/sun/dec never mind an ibm system 36 at $36k
Post #307,624 by malraux 4/21/09 9:31:21 AM Reply	"As good or better" Not what we hear. We hear it's significantly slower. Several companies around here implemented Oracle on it, then switched to Linux because the speed was so atrocious. Add into that the lack of software for the platform and it's a bad idea. Regards, -scott Welcome to Rivendell, Mr. Anderson.
Post #307,627 by boxley 4/21/09 10:05:56 AM Reply	Cant speak to oracle on solaris x86, linux rac would be better there. As fast or faster for other things such as store and forward, transient computations and other items we have experimented with. As far as enterprise support it is cheaper than redhat and the availability of enterprise software is pretty good thanx, bill
Post #307,600 by static 4/20/09 9:22:04 PM Reply	I can see several wins here. Most notably in SQL support. Oracle has shown it tends to regard ANSI compliance as something to be considered rather than aimed toward. But MySQL doesn't have a clean bill-of-health, either. Whatever they do to cross-promote, they will have to start converging their language feature set. The userbase will undoubtedly demand it. :-) I can also see PostGreSQL fanbois salivating at the possible demise of MySQL. :-/ Wade. "Ah -- I take it the doorbell doesn't work?"
Post #307,625 by mvitale 4/21/09 9:38:58 AM Reply	Negative there. I can also see PostGreSQL fanbois salivating at the possible demise of MySQL. :-/ I don't necessarily think so. I'll admit to being a fan of Postgres -- it's what I use, and it's what this website runs on (and has for eons.) But I think that competition in the FOSS database market is a good thing for all and sundry. If this ends up meaning that Postgres is installed as a readily-available option in more hosting centers, that would be a good thing, however. Too many places offer only MySQL (since it's a part of LAMP.) -Mike "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." - Benjamin Franklin, 1759 Historical Review of Pennsylvania
Post #307,661 by static 4/21/09 10:01:52 PM Reply	Oh, I quite agree. More visibility of PostGres can only be A Good Thing. But I've seen several MySQL vs PostGres stoushes online, however, and I would be surprised if there weren't rabid PostGres fans playing up the situation. Wade. "Ah -- I take it the doorbell doesn't work?"
Post #307,665 by CRConrad 4/22/09 7:54:18 AM Reply	Not only PostGres fanboys, either. Firebird . . . . http://sourceforge.net/projects/firebird fanboys, . . . . . http://www.firebirdsql.org/ too! . . . . . . http://www.ibphoenix.com/ (Hey, BTW, are all these "Convert HTML" and "Process WeeCodes" check-boxes supposed to actually do anything? Which combination of them is one required to check/uncheck in order to make it NOT "Convert" anything, but pass my perfectly well-formed HTML links through unmolested?)
Post #307,686 by folkert 4/22/09 3:18:14 PM Reply	Its Broke... dunno when it'll be fixed.
Post #307,692 by static 4/22/09 8:23:17 PM Reply	Indeed. And I suspect others may come out of the woodwork, too! :-) Wade. "Ah -- I take it the doorbell doesn't work?"

Welcome to IWETHEY!