A fully completed first version of MySQL fork MariaDB has come a step closer, with a release candidate delivered by Monty Widenius on Monday. MariaDB 5.1.41 RC is based on the MySQL 5.1 code base, available since November 2008. MySQL-co-founder Widenius called the database RC a "drop-in replacement for any recent MySQL 5.1 …
MySQL go away already
I used to hold Monty in high regard - a successful entrepreneur who gets open source. In open source the best product wins, and the license should make sure you don't have to play the games Monty is now engaged in. Unfortunately for Monty the better product is not a MySQL fork.
I started learning about databases with MySQL and it was a good trip, but I've come to see the light. The only thing it has over PostgreSQL is mindshare - unfortunately when people think open source web application platform they think "LAMP stack", ergo MySQL.
Oh, and when you do replace MySQL also make sure you drop PHP or Perl in favour of Python. You'll never look back.
And when you're at it, drop Linux for Solaris as well.
Table Elimination? wtf
This looks suspiciously like a hack to get round MySQL's inability to do hash joins.
Why wasn't the useless query optimizer fixed instead?
So what exactly did Sun's shareholders get for their $1Bn then? Just the domain name mysql.com it seems.
Not so simple
They got the customer accounts, the developers and the brand.
The original MySQL company was quite profitable, the main business being selling support. The same goes for other OSS vendors like RedHat, whose product can be easily forked (see CentOS). They still have the old customer base. How many enterprises who are currently Sun/Oracle MySQL customers are going to switch over to MariaDB?
The MySQL name and the domain are quite valuable, which is the reason Monty so desperately wants it back. You can make your own for but getting the mindshare among users and developers is not that simple.
Re: Not so simple
"vendors like RedHat, whose product can be easily forked (see CentOS)"
CentOS isn't even a fork, because it is built from the same sources as the official RHEL, with minimal modifications to get rid of Red Hat trademarks and artwork. Their goal is to track RHEL as closely as legally possible. Forks usually want to pick different directions. It really strengthens your point that people still pay for the Red Hat brand and support, even though the free CentOS is a perfectly compatible plug-in replacement.
I always think of CentOS as RHEL, but without RedHat.
Most things here are now (or will be soon) CentOS, which is a definate move forward from Fedora (don't ask). Though in some places we still use RHEL as it's a lot easier to pay for the support rather than get shafted later when someone as anal as Oracle/Dell/etc find out that you're not actually running RHEL, but CentOS.
- Geek's Guide to Britain Kingston's aviation empire: From industry firsts to Airfix heroes
- Analysis Happy 2nd birthday, Windows 8 and Surface: Anatomy of a disaster
- Review Vulture trails claw across Lenovo's touchy N20p Chromebook
- Adobe spies on readers: EVERY DRM page turn leaked to base over SSL
- Analysis The future health of the internet comes down to ONE simple question…