Did Oracle Just Make MySQL Worse?
from the you've-left-your-core-components-exposed dept
With all the buying that Oracle's been doing lately, it would have been fairly easy to overlook the supposedly small acquisition the company made on Friday. In fact, it didn't seem worth posting about. However, as the discussions about the acquisition are spreading, this small deal could actually be a very big deal. Unlike their recent big enterprise software deals that often seemed to be grasping at straws in dwindling markets, buying Innobase may put MySQL in a world of hurt. For years, Oracle has insisted that it doesn't really compete with MySQL at all, but that argument is pretty weak when you look at the overall trends of the market, and the number of companies who are figuring out how to get by pretty nicely with the open source database. However, as Jeremy Zawodny points out, MySQL may have left one of their most important parts completely exposed. Innobase makes a key component of MySQL that it needs to compete effectively... and now Oracle owns it. While Oracle says they'll continue to support it, they're also going to "negotiate" when the contract between Innobase and MySQL comes up for renewal next year. It does make you wonder why MySQL didn't try to buy them earlier, as it certainly looks like a big weakness hasn't just been exposed, but ripped out. It's likely that MySQL will try to figure out some way around this -- and, if not, that some other open source databases will have an opportunity to move up in the world. However, in one small move, it certainly looks like Oracle may have given themselves a bit more breathing room in the database world.Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
RE: Did Oracle Just Make MySQL Worse?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Did Oracle Just Make MySQL Worse?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Did Oracle Just Make MySQL Worse?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Did Oracle Just Make MySQL Worse?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Did Oracle Just Make MySQL Worse?
Jan
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Did Oracle Just Make MySQL Worse?
Integrating InnoDB with MySQL where InnoDB is licensed under the GPL would mandate releasing MySQL only under the GPL.
Bye, bye, licensing revenue. Bye, bye, profitability.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Did Oracle Just Make MySQL Worse?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Did Oracle Just Make MySQL Worse?
...price?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Did Oracle Just Make MySQL Worse?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Did Oracle Just Make MySQL Worse?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Did Oracle Just Make MySQL Worse?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Did Oracle Just Make MySQL Worse?
If anyone else is having problems like this, please contact me or write the pgsql-perform@postgresql.org email list for performance tuning help.
For simple read-only operations, MySQL is a bit faster, but under real-world, read/write loads, PostgreSQL does a bit better. Also note that MySQL is much more lax with its FSYNC policy than PostgreSQL meaning a little more raw speed under certain circumstances, but *much* more likelihood of corruption or data loss in the event of an unexpected power failure.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Tuning postgresql
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Did Oracle Just Make MySQL Worse?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Did Oracle Just Make MySQL Worse?
I don't know, the discussion was about PostgreSQL, Oracle and MySQL.
If you learn to spell, you could use search engines to answer your own question.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Did Oracle Just Make MySQL Worse?
Sorry. PostgreSQL, Firebird, and SQL-Lite are also Free. And they are far better suited for most tasks (when taken as an aggregate)
However, this piece is critical for MySQL to have any competive placement outside of content management. Without InnoDB, you have no transactional support, and I am sure that many of the new features like triggers in MySQL 5 will not run on MyISAM tables.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Did Oracle Just Make MySQL Worse?
Regards, Arjen.
Community Relations Manager, MySQL AB.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Did Oracle Just Make MySQL Worse?
Now that's what I call an authoritative response! (-:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
MySQL's competitive edges vs Oracle...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
No Subject Given
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: No Subject Given
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
No Subject Given
Enjoy, -pc
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
MySQL's license to sell InnoDB was renewed by Orac
To, the poster who said "MySQL corrupts all the time": can you substantiate this? I've used MySQL for many years with not a single integrity problem.
Recently my employer had no hesitation in choosing MySQL 5 for a high availability, transactional, financial application - which was very quick to develop, and setting up replication was a snap. We're in good company, too.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]