Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 18th Oct 2006 16:58 UTC, submitted by wirespot
Databases The popular MySQL database is slated for a future split between what MySQL AB calls the Community and the Enterprise versions. Read the official announcement and further opinions and explanations from Kaj Arno (MySQL VP of Community Relations) and Stephen O'Grady (software industry analist). In Arno's own words: "We recognise that the needs of the MySQL Community are different from the needs of commercial enterprise customers. After 11 years of producing our software, we can no longer hope that a single offering is the best solution for both Community and Enterprise users. Consequently, we are introducing two different offerings for each distinct target group."
Order by: Score:
AKA Money
by Nephelim on Wed 18th Oct 2006 17:38 UTC
Nephelim
Member since:
2006-07-26

It seems that they want to get some money from the enormous amount of people using their excellent products all around the internet, which I find perfectly understandable, I just hope the community version remains as good as it is right now.

Reply Score: 5

RE: AKA Money
by Havin_it on Wed 18th Oct 2006 17:46 UTC in reply to "AKA Money"
Havin_it Member since:
2006-03-10

I hope so too, but I can't help but feel that they wouldn't be doing this if that was the case. My gut screams that they've struck a deal for a decent transactional engine, but which happens to be proprietary.

I'm no analyst, just a knee-jerk reaction to the news. The PostgreSQL team may well be rubbing their hands about now...

Reply Score: 1

only t ime will tell
by TechGeek on Wed 18th Oct 2006 18:11 UTC
TechGeek
Member since:
2006-01-14

Only time will tell. I like MySQL but they are going to have to make sure they don't piss on their community or they will go down in flames.

Reply Score: 5

Should have seen this coming.
by ormandj on Wed 18th Oct 2006 18:18 UTC
ormandj
Member since:
2005-10-09

Seems to be the way open source software companies work. Put out a free version, get people hooked, wait();, create two version:

(1) Weak, limited, crippled, lame-ware version for people who don't want to spend money.

(2) Fully functioning version (generally no different than the previous free-version before the split).

Oh well, more power to them, I'm sticking with pgsql.

Reply Score: 5

RE: Should have seen this coming.
by B. Janssen on Wed 18th Oct 2006 18:30 UTC in reply to "Should have seen this coming."
B. Janssen Member since:
2006-10-11

ormandj: Seems to be the way open source software companies work. Put out a free version, get people hooked, wait();, create two version:

Arguably they are no longer an open sourcesoftware company then ;-)

Reply Score: 2

RE: Should have seen this coming.
by justinbest on Wed 18th Oct 2006 18:51 UTC in reply to "Should have seen this coming."
justinbest Member since:
2006-06-29

Read the announcement.

"ALL OF OUR DATABASE SOFTWARE IS OPEN SOURCE, so we will continue to make all releases available over our BitKeeper tree and as source code tarballs"

They aren't taking away our access to the source. They're simply putting out binaries for customers that want them.

I use PostgreSQL right now, but I've been wanting to switch to MySQL ever since their 5.0 release. The announcement of a more targeted business support structure makes me all the more eager to use MySQL.

Reply Score: 1

ormandj Member since:
2005-10-09

You're the ONLY person I've EVER met who is using pgsql and wants to switch to a less functional database server. That's like getting rid of your "free" BMW and getting a "free" Yugo. Buying into hype/popularity/branding, per-chance? I hope you don't go that route, because it's going to make life hell for your SQL devs and worse yet for your system admins. I sure hope your database isn't used for mission critical transactional processing where data integrity AND validity is key.

I did read the announcement. However, history dictates what will likely occur. I simply postulated as to what will happen, and my opinion is as valid as anybody else's.

Regardless, good luck with your migration, I wish you all the best - but I do hope you listen to reason instead of "buzz". ;)

Reply Score: 5

justinbest Member since:
2006-06-29

Thanks for the advice. No, it's not the "buzz" that I want. My project is a small, in-house data analysis tool written by me, for me. I'm tired of dealing with the quirks of PG (vacuuming all the time, lack of easy-to-set-up performance monitors, etc.)

It could just be my lack of knowledge, but enforcing data integrity with anything over 300,000 rows in my table seems to cause more hassle than help. Performance grinds to a halt with all those internal consistency checks. I didn't experience performance issues back before I rewrote the project to use PG (I used MySQL previously).

So, even though I know I will have to do some extra work client-side, I think the tradeoff will be worth it. We'll see if I ever have the spare time to find out, though!

Reply Score: 2

nathan_c Member since:
2005-07-12

I've used both extensively over the last few years, and they have their benefits. However, before you jump ship from PG->MySQL, here are my recommendations that have helped me with performance issues on PG:

1. If you are using pg7.x, upgrade to the 8.x. It's amazing how many people use older versions (me included) and there's just so much neat stuff in the latest.

2. MySQL is a lot more forgiving of bad/misconfigured databases. Take the time (if you haven't done so) to really index the database well, watch the execution plans (pgadmin has a visual plan analyzer) and see if you can rewrite your poorly performing or most-used queries in a different way. We went from a slow web application (several seconds per some queries) to a very fast app by spending the time to optimize our queries and indices. The same is true for the server config itself. Make sure you understand and set up the configuration properly for the dataset you are anticipating.

3. If this doesn't help and MySQL performs better - make the move. I'm just trying to save you the pain of a migration with some suggestions.

Reply Score: 3

RE: Should have seen this coming.
by borat on Thu 19th Oct 2006 05:10 UTC in reply to "Should have seen this coming."
borat Member since:
2005-11-11

Seems to be the way open source software companies work. Put out a free version, get people hooked, wait();, create two version
...
Oh well, more power to them, I'm sticking with pgsql.


WOW. good job not reading the linked articles at all mr. pgsql fanboy, nice way to harvest mod ups.

We believe the users of MySQL Community Server expect

* early access to MySQL features under development
* that MySQL AB will listen to their input
* timely corrections to bug fixes they report
* help with enhancing MySQL for their particular needs
* channels to communicate with the rest of community for getting assistance
* an easier process for having contributions accepted in MySQL
* commitment to Open Source — including free, unrestricted availability of source code

and this is what we will continue to deliver.

We’re happy to note the growth in contributions flowing into MySQL and its ecosystem. To facilitate these, we have

* launched MySQL Forge (see forge.mysql.com)
* established a Contribution License Agreement (see MySQL_Contributor_License_Agreement on Forge Wiki)
* supported a MySQL Community Camp (see mysqlcamp.org)
* started to Doxygen comment our code for easier understandability (see CommunityDoxygenProject on Forge Wiki)


mysql ab has been very good to the open source community and has no interest in changing that. they need a separate product for enterprise customers who don't want bleeding edge features, they want stability and consistent release cycles. this is nothing new: redhat/fedora, sun/opensolaris.

As part of our differentiation, we will do more frequent binary releases of the MySQL Enterprise Server software than of the MySQL Community Server. However, all of our database software is open source, so we will continue to make all releases available over our BitKeeper tree and as source code tarballs — even if the MySQL Enterprise Server binaries will not be available for public download but limited to our commercial customers and our core QA contributors.

Finally, we will continue to be active good citizens in the greater Free and Open Source Software world. We’re participating in the GPLv3 drafting process, we’re supporting the Free Software Foundation as FSF corporate patrons, and we’re supporting campaigns against the spread of software patents around the globe.


Edited 2006-10-19 05:12

Reply Score: 0

"software industry analist"?
by StephenBeDoper on Wed 18th Oct 2006 18:51 UTC
StephenBeDoper
Member since:
2005-07-06

That doesn't sound like a very pleasant occupation.

Browser: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows 98; PalmSource/hspr-H102; Blazer/4.0) 16;320x320

Reply Score: 5

Changing to Postgres ?
by chicobaud on Thu 19th Oct 2006 12:24 UTC
chicobaud
Member since:
2005-08-14

Assuming MySQL clients are mostly big Web Hosting Bussiness... and NOT big database enterprise level (Insurance, Banking, State Level Records...)

I guess all those Hosting people will start changing from LAMP to Postgres, after all, it does almost the same but better. Still, I liked MySQL.

Reply Score: 1

walterbyrd
Member since:
2005-12-31

I am seeing postgresql offered by lower priced web-hosters (hostmonster) and now there is sqlite.

Hopefully we can get away from these scamming, scox-supporting, weasels.

Reply Score: 1