Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Red Hat Ditches MySQL, Switches To MariaDB

Soulskill posted about a year ago | from the market-share-sinking dept.

Red Hat Software 203

An anonymous reader writes "Red Hat will switch the default database in its enterprise distribution, RHEL, from MySQL to MariaDB, when version 7 is released. MySQL's first employee in Australia, Arjen Lentz, said Fedora and OpenSuSE were community driven, whereas RHEL's switch to MariaDB was a corporate decision with far-reaching implications. 'I presume there is not much love lost between Red Hat and Oracle (particularly since the "Oracle Linux" stuff started) but I'm pretty sure this move won't make Oracle any happier,' said Lentz, who now runs his own consultancy, Open Query, from Queensland. 'Thus it's a serious move in political terms.' He said that in practical terms, MariaDB should now get much more of a public footprint with people (people knowing about MariaDB and it being a/the replacement for MySQL), and direct acceptance both by individual users and corporates."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

MariaDB? (3, Funny)

ArcadeMan (2766669) | about a year ago | (#44006641)

I use unencrypted XML and CSV files you insensitive clod!

Re:MariaDB? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44006787)

Don't laugh - I worked for a company which used an excel sheet as a database. The tech would actually have to manually resize the table border in that sheet when the table became too full of test results. Labview + Visual Basic for the win.

-- Ethanol-fueled

I am bootyass process! Bow to me. (-1, Offtopic)

stanIyb (2945195) | about a year ago | (#44007019)

Don't read this... it is a curse...

In 1998, a little boy named Timmy was enjoying a relaxing day at the beach with his beloved family. Being the curious and adventurous young lad that he was, he managed to sneak away from his family and traveled far enough away from them that they could just barely see him from where they were located. Little Timmy, while walking, then noticed a small lizard beanie baby sitting in the sand, looking up towards him. They exchanged greetings, and then, feeling daring, Timmy said, "I betcha can't lick my buttcheeks!"

The lizard replied in a confident tone, "I bet I can!" Then, the lizard beanie baby's tongue stuck out a few centimeters in front of its face and stopped moving. Timmy, not understanding the situation, gazed at it in puzzlement. Suddenly, he heard and felt something slimy smack his precious cheek! He couldn't believe it! It was as if most of the lizard's tongue was invisible and that he could stretch it and make it move anywhere he wanted from any location!

Timmy, still feeling daring, then said, "I betcha can't lick my buttcrack!" In the same confident tone, the lizard replied, "I bet I can!" and the exact same event as before happened once again. The lizard stuck out its tongue a few centimeters, and mere moments later, something hit Timmy's bare buttcrack. This caused Timmy to jump in the air from surprise.

Timmy, angry that the lizard's tongue violated his precious snap, screamed, "I betcha can't lick my butthole!" This time, his voice didn't have the daring tone that it had before. The lizard almost immediately replied, in a confident tone that sounded as if he knew precisely what would happen, "I bet I can!" Regretting his decision to dare the lizard immensely, Timmy began begging and pleading for the lizard to stop. Despite this rather sad turn of events, an invisible, wet tongue smacked Timmy's bootysnapcheekcrackhole moments later! The lizard had slurped his most prized possession!

Infuriated that his most precious spot was violated by the dirty little lizard's tongue, Timmy attempted to kick the lizard. However, to his surprise, the lizard was somehow able to avoid the blow and crawl into his pant leg! Timmy could see a small lump on his pant leg slowly make its way towards his ass! Thinking quickly, Timmy used his hands to block its path. Feeling victorious, he smirked and began mocking the lizard. Seconds later, the lump somehow managed to effortlessly move right under the obstacles that were Timmy's hands and continued merrily on its way!

Timmy, frightened, tried desperately to take off his jeans, but it was as if they were glued to his body! The lizard finally made its way to Timmy's ass, crawled between his ass cheeks, climbed on top of his precious hole, and then stopped. As if it had stopped just to make Timmy even more frightened, the lizard began its mission as soon as Timmy's dread became apparent. The lizard crawled all over Timmy's bootysnapcheekcrackhole in a square pattern, stopped at each corner of the imaginary square for about a second, and then moved to the next corner.

Each time it crawled, each time it moved, a sinister rattling sound was heard, and tremendous amounts of tickle were inflicted upon Timmy's ass! He could do nothing but try to endure it, but there is no way that any being in existence could endure having such concentrated amounts of tickle inflicted upon their ass. He screamed and pleaded for it to stop, but to no avail. The lizard continued crawling, and Timmy heard it let out an ominous laugh...

Now that you have read even a single word of this, the very same lizard puppet will effortlessly make its way to your bootysnapcheekcrackhole, and crawl all over it to inflict preposterous amounts of tickle upon your ass! To prevent this from occurring, copy this entire story and post it as a comment three times.

Re:MariaDB? (-1, Offtopic)

stanIyb (2945195) | about a year ago | (#44006885)

I have become an absolute bootynude.

Re:MariaDB? (3, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44007461)

The interesting part is: will Oracle's copy of RHEL include the change to use MariaDB?

Or will they 'fork' to keep their own MySQL?

Wish I was a fly on the wall @ oracle when this gets discussed :)

3, 2, 1 (0, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44006661)

Here come the PostgreSQL fanboys, adding their standard fodder to everything related to MySQL.

Re:3, 2, 1 (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44006881)

This is a victory for Free Software as a whole. We can argue about ACID tests another day.

Congrats to the MariaDB team for making quality fork and fulfilling the dream of the GPL: that WHEN corporations try to buy/take our code we'll simply route around the damage.

Good job Gentlemen.

Re:3, 2, 1 (3, Informative)

frodo from middle ea (602941) | about a year ago | (#44007033)

You do realize that they were the ones who sold MySQL to Oracle in the first place, right ?

Re:3, 2, 1 (-1, Flamebait)

stanIyb (2945195) | about a year ago | (#44007059)

Wow! Another Slashdot intellectual for me to defeat without a single problem! Why are you cowerin' as such never before!? Know your folly, Slashdot intellectual! It's time for me to grand slam your bare ass right into a mysterious fuckin' dark alley! Wow! A quarter going down a slot machine!

Such a thing!

Re:3, 2, 1 (5, Insightful)

arth1 (260657) | about a year ago | (#44007327)

You do realize that they were the ones who sold MySQL to Oracle in the first place, right ?

No. Open source people never sold MySQL to Oracle.

What happened is that Monty sold MySQL to Sun, with a clause that it must not be sold to Oracle.
Oracle then bought Sun.

Re:3, 2, 1 (1)

greg1104 (461138) | about a year ago | (#44007475)

Which part of that is supposed to make people feel comfortable that MariaDB will still be around in a few years, after Monty gets an offer to buy that company? "Insanity is repeating the same mistakes and expecting different results"

Re:3, 2, 1 (1)

arth1 (260657) | about a year ago | (#44007897)

Which part of that is supposed to make people feel comfortable that MariaDB will still be around in a few years, after Monty gets an offer to buy that company?

That you (or anyone) can fork it. Open source routes around this problem nicely.

Re:3, 2, 1 (2)

greg1104 (461138) | about a year ago | (#44008073)

Open source doesn't remove the damage here, it just contains it. Look at how much effort is being wasted by people who are switching from MySQL to MariaDB now. All of that overhead is damage to an open source community that could have been working on other things with that time. If you're smart, instead you'll switch to a truly open database, one that doesn't have a company requiring copyright assignment involved at all.

MySQL was a reasonable choice back when PostgreSQL didn't have Windows support and people needed that to do development. Now there's really no good reason to put efforts into a MySQL->MariaDB change, not when there are viable free alternatives and MariaDB has the same fundamental problem that destroyed MySQL. The right answer for an open source community is to route completely past MySQL and its ugly dual-licensed code altogether, use this transition point to migrate off there altogether.

Re:3, 2, 1 (1)

XanC (644172) | about a year ago | (#44008381)

There isn't any effort to migrate from MySQL to MariaDB. It's a drop-in replacement.

Re:3, 2, 1 (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44008113)

> "Insanity is repeating the same mistakes and expecting different results"

please stop repeating this garbage

Re:3, 2, 1 (1)

saider (177166) | about a year ago | (#44007389)

So they get to keep doing what they were doing AND have a boatload of cash in the bank.

Re:3, 2, 1 (-1, Flamebait)

VGPowerlord (621254) | about a year ago | (#44007111)

Congrats to the MariaDB team for making quality fork and fulfilling the dream of the GPL: that WHEN corporations try to buy/take our code we'll simply route around the damage.

Here's the real solution: Don't sell it to a corporation in the first place like Monty did.

Do I even need to point out that this kind of thing hurts the perception of Open Source developers and by extension Open Source software? Then again, it's about time we have a term to replace the horribly racist "Indian Giver [wikipedia.org] " term. "MySQLGiver" maybe? "Open Source Giver"?

Re:3, 2, 1 (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44007299)

Right. Because every time I hear "Indian Giver" I think of Native Americans.

Damn those Algonquins!

Re:3, 2, 1 (4, Informative)

ShanghaiBill (739463) | about a year ago | (#44007449)

Here's the real solution: Don't sell it to a corporation in the first place like Monty did.

MySQL had already been owned by a corporation for more than a decade before Sun bought it. That corporation was "MySQL AB", incorporated in Sweden.

Re:3, 2, 1 (1)

saider (177166) | about a year ago | (#44007501)

Monty made some money for himself - why shouldn't he do this, particularly when the sale of the product would not have any material long term impact to the availability of the product.

Sun paid him off, and now he is doing the exact same thing, in open source, he gets to keep his money, and Oracle now has zero influence over this open source project.

Win, win, win, win(unless you are Oracle)!

Maybe he can do this every 10 years and buy a new boat. Good for him. It will also help get the message across that you really cannot buy Open Source software.

Re:3, 2, 1 (1)

gorzek (647352) | about a year ago | (#44007643)

Given that there are plenty of good alternatives, it seems that the real value in MySQL is the branding. Oracle could've bought any DB engine they wanted, but which open-source one has the most name recognition? Sometimes, "what's in a name" turns out to be "everything."

Re:3, 2, 1 (1)

arth1 (260657) | about a year ago | (#44007627)

Here's the real solution: Don't sell it to a corporation in the first place like Monty did.

That's easy for you to say, not being in Monty's shoes.
Selling it helped him pay alimony and child support for his daughter My [*], for which the database was named.

And it did not kill the open source - as per usual, it forked around it, and evolution continued.

[*]: Off-topic: Pronounced with a near-close near-front protruded vowel, which doesn't exist[**] in English. The closest approximation is "ee" said with the lips rounded like saying "oo". "Y" is a vowel in its own right in Swedish, and saying "Mee" is as bad as saying "Moo". Which is why Monty doesn't object to the common "Mai-SQL" pronunciation - it's better than the alternatives.
[**]: Off-topic: Parents who give their children names that aren't pronouncable in major languages like English are bastards. I know this first hand, and had to change my name.

Re:3, 2, 1 (2)

krammit (540755) | about a year ago | (#44008051)

Do I even need to point out that this kind of thing hurts the perception of Open Source developers and by extension Open Source software? Then again, it's about time we have a term to replace the horribly racist "Indian Giver [wikipedia.org]" term. "MySQLGiver" maybe? "Open Source Giver"?

You're right. Such an egregious abuse could never happen with closed source software. *cough*Skype*cough*

Re:3, 2, 1 (4, Funny)

adnonsense (826530) | about a year ago | (#44006889)

Nah, Postgres sucks. Doesn't even have a decent REPAIR TABLE command or support for Februaries which have more than 29 days.

Re:3, 2, 1 (-1, Flamebait)

stanIyb (2945195) | about a year ago | (#44006935)

Why are you cowering? It's because my power is incomprehensible to a pathetic individual such as yourself! Just vanish already, and don't you dare return until you become One With Gamemaker! Return to Gamemakerdom immediately, you worthless sow!

Re:3, 2, 1 (4, Insightful)

bluefoxlucid (723572) | about a year ago | (#44007003)

Sure, why not? MySQL is crap. MySQL is crap [arstechnica.com] . 10 years later, MySQL is still crap. MariaDB and Percona are less crap, but still crap.

Oracle is on-par with PostgreSQL, with some drawbacks, and you can argue and haggle--personally I think Oracle is inferior, but you'll get dissenters and they *are* in the same class. MS SQL Server is inferior--it's a good product in its space, but its space is a subset space of PostgreSQL. More to the point, Oracle and MS SQL Server are both closed, proprietary pay-ware; PostgreSQL, MySQL, DB2, and SQLite are free. That means the argument is essentially PostgreSQL vs MySQL.

PostgreSQL actually functions like a real database (MySQL does a lot of crap it shouldn't), outperforms MySQL, has working replication now (FINALLY, since around 8.0-ish, a few short years back), has BETTER replication than MySQL, and is about as easy to set up (I learned it in about 30 minutes). In general it's a better product as a database. Since it has no real drawbacks besides blunt protocol compatibility (i.e. a MySQL-specific app can't talk to PostgreSQL, either because of network presentation protocol (MySQL protocol 3306) or application protocol (MySQL-specific command language)) compared to MySQL, and many advantages, it's essentially a higher-quality and thus better piece of software.

Optimally, RedHat, Debian, Ubuntu, SuSE, etc should provide the best MySQL possible--Percona, MariaDB, whatever--while providing the guideline that PostgreSQL is a better product. Because, hell, they're already endorsing by dumping MySQL instead of simply including both Percona and MariaDB. The issue is that the political chip of saying, "X is better than Y," is very volatile. We could sit here and hash out merits and come to that exact conclusion--but even then, when we're all convinced that this is FACT and not OPINION, what do you think would happen if RedHat and Ubuntu both flatly said, "Use PostgreSQL, MySQL is crap"?

Re:3, 2, 1 (1, Insightful)

JDG1980 (2438906) | about a year ago | (#44007127)

If you buy web hosting from a cheap cpanel-based provider, you get MySQL for free and it's hard to set up anything else. Moreover, a moderately skilled web developer can get a database-driven site set up in just a couple of minutes with PHP+MySQL.

MySQL+PHP is popular for the same reason VB6 used to be popular. It's quick and easy and it gets stuff done. Elite computer scientists look down upon both because they are perceived as quick and dirty hacks. But that doesn't matter; for many applications, a quick and dirty hack is good enough.

Re:3, 2, 1 (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44007325)

If you think Oracle is inferior maybe you need to learn performance tuning.

Re:3, 2, 1 (1)

TheSunborn (68004) | about a year ago | (#44007677)

But if Oracle require special performance tuning which none of the other databases does, then it does suck in 90+ percent of all usecases for sql servers(That is: The usecases where there is no fulltime person hired just to tune the database).
   

Re:3, 2, 1 (2)

deadbeatsaint (937190) | about a year ago | (#44007981)

But if Oracle require special performance tuning which none of the other databases does, then it does suck in 90+ percent of all usecases for sql servers(That is: The usecases where there is no fulltime person hired just to tune the database).

This is very true. I work on many different projects and move from company to company setting up web applications, usually for in-house use - well, after I'm finished, I don't have time to constantly come back and re-tune the database, nor would the company want me to do that and keep paying for an application that is essentially "completed". Also, hiring a full-time database tuner would be ridiculous for all of the cases I've been involved in (monetarily crazy and otherwise). Some places using MySQL for my application is more than enough, however, when its not, I setup PostgreSQL. It only requires a little more design time on my part and the results and great.

Re:3, 2, 1 (1)

gmuslera (3436) | about a year ago | (#44007289)

PostgreSQL is included with RedHat too, is not taken out. But, if despite all what its critics say, you still want a MySQLish database in Redhat, then you will have MariaDB, that is more performant and more future proof in the open side than MySQL.

Red Hat (5, Funny)

ArcadeMan (2766669) | about a year ago | (#44006665)

We're nobody's bitch.

Business use (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44006673)

Red Hat might switch to MariaDB from MySQL, but businnesses still use MSSQL server.

Re:Business use (1)

bmo (77928) | about a year ago | (#44006751)

>businesses still use MSSQL server

No, they use Ingres.

--
BMO

Re:Business use (-1, Troll)

stanIyb (2945195) | about a year ago | (#44007071)

My ass is a bit rancid, you know. What say you?

Re:Business use (1)

Tridus (79566) | about a year ago | (#44006771)

Except for the ones that use Oracle. Or any of the other databases out there.

"Business" is a pretty broad category using a very wide range of database products.

Re:Business use (1)

smooth wombat (796938) | about a year ago | (#44007191)

Except for the ones that use Oracle.

Oracle sucks as well. It's just a different kind of suck. Sort of like the difference between a Geo Metro and a Ford Taurus. They both suck, just in different ways. (Did I get the car analogy right?)

Re: Business use (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44007931)

Well done Red Hat and MariaDB. Finally back to open understandable cheap DB support.

Fuck you Oracle. You don't have customers, you have hostages.

Buy something, then squeeze the customer's balls because you know that it is too painful to change from your stagnating 80s shitware.

Re:Business use (1)

arkane1234 (457605) | about a year ago | (#44006791)

Businesses use both, actually. Bank Of America, Wells Fargo, American Express, Charles Schwab... I could go on and on.
MSSQL is mostly used when Microsoft-related items need to query the data, or some other product that drank from the Microsoft kool-aid. Every other time, I've seen a mix of Oracle, MySQL, & Postgres.

With a smattering of db2.

Re:Business use (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44006907)

DB2 needs to die in a nice long fire. ... with the 40 year old machines it's running on.

Yes, I'm bitter.

Re:Business use (1)

mwvdlee (775178) | about a year ago | (#44007063)

Yeah! Who needs machines that run for 40 years.

Re:Business use (1)

bws111 (1216812) | about a year ago | (#44007207)

DB2 runs on 32- and 64-bit Intel and AMD processors, POWER processors, and System Z processors. Please tell us which of those is 40 years old.

Re:Business use (1)

RabidReindeer (2625839) | about a year ago | (#44008399)

DB2 runs on 32- and 64-bit Intel and AMD processors, POWER processors, and System Z processors. Please tell us which of those is 40 years old.

I run DB2 on 64-bit Intel. I pray that one day it will add the same level of import/export capabilities that come for free with both MySQL and PostgreSQL. Or at least that I can do a dump from an i5 system to the Intel system.

For that matter, I would be overjoyed if they'd just do like everyone else and add a create-from-select SQL option.

Re:Business use (2)

Mitchell314 (1576581) | about a year ago | (#44006809)

HAH. Real businesses just store everything in word docs with the timestamps in the file name.

Re:Business use (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44007169)

Real businesses use a craptastic Access database with a bunch of hackish VBscript layered on top, in my experience.

Re:Business use (1)

ttucker (2884057) | about a year ago | (#44007811)

Red Hat might switch to MariaDB from MySQL, but businnesses still use MSSQL server.

MSSQL is an expensive turd.

Oracle Linux is identical to RHEL (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44006699)

... except for the parts that aren't.

(waves arms)

Re:Oracle Linux is identical to RHEL (1)

arkane1234 (457605) | about a year ago | (#44006807)

Like the name?

Re:Oracle Linux is identical to RHEL (5, Insightful)

greg1104 (461138) | about a year ago | (#44006837)

The main thing Oracle Linux does is run a newer kernel version than the RHEL kernel. RHEL6 for example is based on 2.6.32, while Oracle's Unbreakable Enterprise Kernel R.2 [oracle.com] (pdf) was running 3.0.16 when they last updated things.

Grabbing the newer kernel lets Oracle win direct performance shootouts against RedHat. They can get away with it because the only applications they're testing on it is Oracle, so if the upstream kernel breaks other things they don't care. RedHat cares about all of their supported software, so they have a lot more QA issues to deal with. Note that this little trick is also how Oracle has gotten around caring that RedHat made it harder to see what individual patches they apply to the upstream kernel in their release. They aren't using that version of kernel at all, so whatever RedHat is doing to customer their 2.6.32 branch they're ignoring.

Of course, if you're willing to do this, you can easily grab a newer Linux kernel from kernel.org yourself on regular RHEL, too. The game Oracle is playing with "Unbreakable Linux" is all marketing hype.

Re:Oracle Linux is identical to RHEL (2)

silas_moeckel (234313) | about a year ago | (#44007179)

Pretty much the only thing anybody run on it is oracle anyways. If your going to pay through the nose for support contracts you might as well have one place supporting the whole thing.to stop the finger pointing.

Re:Oracle Linux is identical to RHEL (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44008355)

Obviously you have never dealt with a vendor who likes to point fingers to "other departments"

Re:Oracle Linux is identical to RHEL (1)

bill_mcgonigle (4333) | about a year ago | (#44007743)

Of course, if you're willing to do this, you can easily grab a newer Linux kernel from kernel.org yourself on regular RHEL, too.

Even better, install elrepo.repo and enable the elrepo-kernel repo and install the package 'kernel-ml'.

I just build a CentOS 6-based Xen server last weekend with kernel-ml and mayoung's xen packages, and it's a beautiful thing.

Yes, it was a corporate decision (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44006723)

A decision not to use corporate-controlled software.

MySQL is Dead! Just like Cobol (3, Insightful)

WaywardGeek (1480513) | about a year ago | (#44006731)

Seriously, is anyone out there in geek land even considering MySQL for a brand spanking new project with no history attached to MySQL? I don't know of any. It's just a matter of time now for things to swing from MySQL to MariaDB, though I think a lot of geeks will take a good look at other options like PostgreSQL before switching. Unless Oracle does something really interesting with MySQL, it's dead... seriously... no one in the year 2120 will even remember MySQL except for unfortunate geeks working for the government and large banks who will continue doing new projects with MySQL until the end of time.

Re:MySQL is Dead! Just like Cobol (2)

Tridus (79566) | about a year ago | (#44006781)

If it's really dead like Cobol, I could spend the rest of my life doing nothing but supporting stuff using it, and make a pretty good career out of it.

That's a kind of death I can live with.

Re:MySQL is Dead! Just like Cobol (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44006819)

govt and large banks? on MySQL?

Re:MySQL is Dead! Just like Cobol (2)

arkane1234 (457605) | about a year ago | (#44006925)

Yes.

Re:MySQL is Dead! Just like Cobol (3, Informative)

greg1104 (461138) | about a year ago | (#44006917)

MySQL filled a niche for web application development, but not very much else. The large banks are all using old-school commercial databases: Oracle, DB2, Sybase, SQL Server. Government applications prefer PostgreSQL because of its permissive license. If they want to customize the source code for a project that isn't pubic, they can do that without having to worry about GPL compliance.

Re:MySQL is Dead! Just like Cobol (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44007027)

I'm not sure the government has any business doing pubic projects.
But seriously, why would GPL compliance enter into a government project?
If they're just running code and not distributing it, there's nothing to comply with.

Re:MySQL is Dead! Just like Cobol (1)

gmuslera (3436) | about a year ago | (#44007247)

In the other hand, in some countries there are a pledge for using open formats for government data, something that could give a chance to keep using, or take the information from it, even after the company behind it closes or just decide to switch direction, maybe many years after. The code that is behind don't need to be open source, but usually if is, then the format of the data is open too (or at least, the way to access it).

Re:MySQL is Dead! Just like Cobol (2)

Hognoxious (631665) | about a year ago | (#44007663)

If they want to customize the source code for a project that isn't pubic, they can do that without having to worry about GPL compliance.

I worked on one of those and man, it was hairy. In the end we pulled it off, but it was a close shave.

Re:MySQL is Dead! Just like Cobol (1)

Frosty Piss (770223) | about a year ago | (#44007995)

Government applications prefer PostgreSQL because of its permissive license. If they want to customize the source code for a project that isn't pubic, they can do that without having to worry about GPL compliance.

Why would they care if they are not *distributing* the application ouside GOV?

Re:MySQL is Dead! Just like Cobol (2)

greg1104 (461138) | about a year ago | (#44008337)

In any large organization, guaranteeing that something you do will not get distributed outside of its original domain adds a compliance cost. The idea that compliance with a license is overhead that really does cost something has already been beaten into larger organization's heads by the terms of commercial software like Microsoft's, where audits and possible violations are a real cost of doing business.

Companies familiar with open source licenses know that if they touch GPL code but keep it private, they're on the hook for continuing the comply with the related license terms. Who can say if five years from now, today's internal application will move outside its original boundaries? Having restrictive license terms paperwork that has to follow the application around forever is exactly the kind of crap governments adopting open source software are trying to get rid of.

If you just use something with a BSD or MIT license from day one, you don't even have to worry about it. All of the paperwork and license review CYA compliance audit costs are up-front.

Re:MySQL is Dead! Just like Cobol (3, Insightful)

Intrepid imaginaut (1970940) | about a year ago | (#44006947)

Many hosting packages have MySQL installed as default, almost all of them in fact, and web devs are unlikely to have any interest in moving. I mean what are they going to tell their clients, someone in a far away office unconnected to anything has decided that the DB system is outdated, so you have pay us to migrate your data? Oh, says the client, will it offer me any benefits or will my site stop working? Why no, says the web dev. Please.

Inertia means a lot, and MySQL has a LOT of inertia.

Re:MySQL is Dead! Just like Cobol (2)

h4rr4r (612664) | about a year ago | (#44007291)

There is nothing you tell the client. You dump the DB out of mysql and load it in maria.

Not like they are switching to something not compatible.

Re:MySQL is Dead! Just like Cobol (2)

dave420 (699308) | about a year ago | (#44007451)

It's not even that complicated for most users - simply shut down MySQL, point MariaDB to the MySQL configuration, start MariaDB, and that's it.

Re:MySQL is Dead! Just like Cobol (1)

Intrepid imaginaut (1970940) | about a year ago | (#44007593)

Who's going to pay for this effort again?

Re:MySQL is Dead! Just like Cobol (1)

h4rr4r (612664) | about a year ago | (#44007665)

The customers, via their normal bill.

The servers have to be upgraded at some point, EOL and all. The service provider will at that point move to mariaDB and not even tell the customer.

Re:MySQL is Dead! Just like Cobol (1)

Intrepid imaginaut (1970940) | about a year ago | (#44007815)

You clearly have no experience with web development. Most of the sites on the internet are in shared hosting packages, anything that gets less than a few hundred thousand hits a month. The only thing these sites are charged for are hosting and domain names. Anything that involves any kind of effort on the part of the developer gets charged for seperately. Hosting companies are quite capable of keeping the same software on new servers indefinetely.

Honestly I'm not seeing anyone flocking to the flag of the guy who's already sold MySQL for a vast sum of money unless someone's paying them for it. If it works, don't fix it.

Re:MySQL is Dead! Just like Cobol (1)

h4rr4r (612664) | about a year ago | (#44008243)

You are clearly full of it.

New servers will not run old versions of MySQL at some point. This means they will have to decide if they want to install new MySQL or MariaDB. That is when the latter will go into place since it is the redhat standard.

Re:MySQL is Dead! Just like Cobol (1)

mwvdlee (775178) | about a year ago | (#44007133)

I've worked for several government deparments and large banks.
IBM mainframe uses DB2, everything else uses Oracle. No exceptions (atleast as far as databases supporting SQL goes).

Too big momentum to stop (2)

dejanc (1528235) | about a year ago | (#44007215)

Seriously, is anyone out there in geek land even considering MySQL for a brand spanking new project with no history attached to MySQL? I don't know of any. It's just a matter of time now for things to swing from MySQL to MariaDB, though I think a lot of geeks will take a good look at other options like PostgreSQL before switching. Unless Oracle does something really interesting with MySQL, it's dead... seriously... no one in the year 2120 will even remember MySQL except for unfortunate geeks working for the government and large banks who will continue doing new projects with MySQL until the end of time.

MySQL has too big of a momentum to just disappear (and the people keeping it alive are not governments and large banks, but rather web developers).

I'm a full-time web developer and I am just starting a new project and tossing a coin between MySQL and Postgresql. The reason why I am even considering MySQL is that all my existing code and libraries are thoroughly tested with it. Even brand spanking new projects use old libraries :)

In theory, database abstraction layer should be good enough to make everything work with pgsql, but it hasn't been tested. There are other reasons too, like other developers being uncomfortable with pgsql (namely sequences vs. mysql's auto incremented primary keys) as well as the fact that all of them will have to look for new tools for the alternative. Also, Mysql replication is very well established and easy to do and system administrators are part of the equation.

We just updated all our servers to Debian Wheezy which comes stock with MySQL 5.5, which with Innodb is half-decent. From what I see, it's still actively developed and I don't see it just disappearing... Oracle may be a place where open source software goes to die, but MySQL may change the trend.

think I can petition my college to.. (1)

nopainogain (1091795) | about a year ago | (#44006765)

,,, refund the money they charged while teaching me LAMP? lol

Re:think I can petition my college to.. (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44006841)

Why? Anything you might have learnt applies just as much to MariaDB as it did to MySQL.

Re:think I can petition my college to.. (2)

mwvdlee (775178) | about a year ago | (#44007159)

I recently upgraded to MariaDB. Took a whole of 5 minutes with just a few seconds downtime (just ~3GB of data, though); nothing changed except I occasionally see a different name in logfiles and tools.

Re:think I can petition my college to.. (1)

ArcadeMan (2766669) | about a year ago | (#44006893)

At least it isn't called EvanDB.

Re:think I can petition my college to.. (1)

arkane1234 (457605) | about a year ago | (#44006897)

Sure, just as schools will refund the money charged to students while teaching them every other technology that evolved...

Re:think I can petition my college to.. (1)

nopainogain (1091795) | about a year ago | (#44006991)

I'm starting a charity for those grads of that stagecoach-repair-program at CHI..haha. but you do have to work to remain current in IT.

Re:think I can petition my college to.. (1)

Gothmolly (148874) | about a year ago | (#44006923)

You know that MySQL and MariaDB both start with M, right?

Did you really go to college?

Re:think I can petition my college to.. (1)

nopainogain (1091795) | about a year ago | (#44006953)

yes I am, troll, are you aware that Unix classes don't (or at least didn't) teach LAMP without MySQL? The "P" is the variable. PHP, Perl, etc..Who didn't go to college?

Re:think I can petition my college to.. (1)

geminidomino (614729) | about a year ago | (#44007353)

Might want to be careful with throwing "troll" around, if you're going to miss/ignore rather important things like Maria being a drop-in replacement for MySQL, so nothing you learned about LAMP is lost by this change.

But what the hell university teaches LAMP anyway? UoP?

Re:think I can petition my college to.. (1)

gl4ss (559668) | about a year ago | (#44007443)

what real college teaches "lamp".

the same kind that has "ford engines" as a course on their machinery side?

Re:think I can petition my college to.. (1)

Hognoxious (631665) | about a year ago | (#44007731)

Stop it, you'll set Joe_Dragon off.

Re:think I can petition my college to.. (3, Insightful)

h4rr4r (612664) | about a year ago | (#44007313)

Teaching you LAMP?
Teaching any programs is foolish, they should teach that you need an OS, a webserver, a db and a language for your site. Knowing the basics will let you easily work on many stacks.

Re:think I can petition my college to.. (1)

KingMotley (944240) | about a year ago | (#44007351)

Sure, send me a copy so I can replace LAMP with COBOL and JCL.

mod down (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44006891)

Never Heeded [goat.cx]

MongoDB included at last (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44007141)

We should all move to MongoDB it's web scale!!!

actual enterprise database (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44007217)

It would have been nice if they switched their enterprise distribution to an actual enterprise database.

Fucking old news (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44007399)

Fuck you and your stupid bullshit outdated posts.

Oracle Doesn't Care (5, Insightful)

organgtool (966989) | about a year ago | (#44007453)

but I'm pretty sure this move won't make Oracle any happier

I'm pretty sure Oracle couldn't care less if RedHat uses MySQL or MariaDB since it doesn't benefit greatly from either. Oracle would much rather have everyone using Oracle DB since that is where they put most of their development and support efforts and that is what makes them their money. I don't think Oracle would even continue to offer MySQL support if they weren't ordered to do so under the conditions of their buyout of Sun.

Great in theory (2)

houbou (1097327) | about a year ago | (#44007497)

Seems like MariaDB is the greatest thing after sliced bread, but, unless you are running your own server, many hosting services are still offering mySQL as the DB to use. I was going to check out MariaDB, but for now, unless I have a requirement from a client, it doesn't seem like its worth my time to use. It is still a WAMP and LAMP world out there for the most part.

Re:Great in theory (1)

gl4ss (559668) | about a year ago | (#44008417)

you might still check it out.
it's the same thing, with some new stuff / new stuff coming that you might need.

but "not worth my time" attitude is kinda strange since it takes no time at all to use it?

Re:Great in theory (1)

hweimer (709734) | about a year ago | (#44008439)

That's why this announcement by Red Hat is so important, it means that RHEL/CentOS-based hosters are likely to make the switch to MariaDB when they upgrade their systems.

Oracull (2)

Tablizer (95088) | about a year ago | (#44007871)

A company called Computer Associates used to be where formerly successful commercial apps went to die a slow, painful death.

Now Oracle is where OSS branches goes to die a slow, painful death.

That's it for me (1)

holophrastic (221104) | about a year ago | (#44007955)

I've been looking for an excuse to make the switch. And this does it for me. I'll be switched by the end of the year.

MariaDB (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44007989)

I would like to mention that Mageia 3 also switched from mysql to mariadb

cheers all

Why not PostgreSQL? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44008017)

????????

Love MariaDB with only one complaint (3, Informative)

EmperorOfCanada (1332175) | about a year ago | (#44008133)

I made the switch and couldn't be happier. I haven't done an official speed comparison but it seems that MariaDB is much more responsive. That tiny little ms counter in Sequel Pro is showing much shorter times for routine tasks.

But the fulltext indexing is not available to the default table engine. That is my one complaint.

I would be curious to know what the insider thinking is at Oracle. I suspect they thought they had the free database crowd by the balls. No doubt they had all kinds of interesting long term strategies to switch companies over from MySQL to overpriced Oracle products. Now those strategies are going to fade into nothingness.

I have to say (1)

AdmV0rl0n (98366) | about a year ago | (#44008247)

MariaBD is something of a lame name. Its gonna be harder to pitch/sell than the well named 'MySQL'..

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?