Results 1 to 22 of 22
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    219

    Sun to close sourse MySQL

    Has anyone else read this? http://developers.slashdot.org/artic.../04/16/2337224
    From reading the article it would seem the eventually all of MySQL will be closed source.

    What other alternatives do you see besides postgresql?

    Does anyone have any further information about their future plans?
    Plutomic Hosting
    Empowering Your Web Ventures
    In Business Since 2005
    Specializing in Web Hosting, VPS, Managed Dedicated Servers and Managed Colocation

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    829
    Wow thats scary.... very scary.

    How good is postgressql? I've never actually used it.

    Is it time I start considering writing my own DBMS? lol

    Oh, and I hope someone has the latest source stashed somewhere... Maybe a private group can continue to develop it, or would that be illegal now? I don't get it, I figured the GPL protected against things like this, but whats the point when they can just make it not GPL anymore?

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    6,984
    Sounds bad, but will it be like Redhat where they sell the commercial product but leave Fedora free? There is a few alternatives to MySQL but really done as good and popular.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    SF Bay Area
    Posts
    877
    Quote Originally Posted by Plutomic-Andrew View Post
    Has anyone else read this? http://developers.slashdot.org/artic.../04/16/2337224
    From reading the article it would seem the eventually all of MySQL will be closed source.

    What other alternatives do you see besides postgresql?
    Sounds a bit apocalyptic. Not sure why this means dumping MySQL generally.

    They can't close source all of MySQL as it's GPL. Certainly they have the right to close source new or enterprise features that they make available to those who pay for it.

    RedHat does this. So does Citrix/Xensource and distributions based on Xen like Virtual Iron, which is not at all free and no doubt has closed source components such as the management interface. Groundwork, based on Nagios, also has an enterprise version which has closed source features.

    They -- RH especially -- all use enterprise revenue from closed source apps to fund improvements that trickle into, for example, the Linux kernel, which RH commits heavily to.

    I suppose OSS zealots will really rip into this one but I thought MySQL AB already had closed source enterprise features before Sun ever purchased it. I can understand the resentment however since it's the zealots contributing to the code base and thereby to the success of the product in the first place. It seems at least a marginal slap in the face to the OSS community.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    3,582
    Quote Originally Posted by Red Squirrel View Post
    Wow thats scary.... very scary.

    How good is postgressql? I've never actually used it.

    Is it time I start considering writing my own DBMS? lol

    Oh, and I hope someone has the latest source stashed somewhere... Maybe a private group can continue to develop it, or would that be illegal now? I don't get it, I figured the GPL protected against things like this, but whats the point when they can just make it not GPL anymore?
    I always look at PostgreSQL as MySQL's cousin. MySQL was always the faster one but PostgreSQL had more features such as triggers, procedures ect. However over the last few versions they've got very close to each other in terms of features and performance. What is lacking in PostgreSQL now is more support from web hosts and some of it's tools are still not as good as MySQL's but they're damn close.
    Tony B. - Chief Executive Officer
    Hawk Host Inc. Proudly serving websites since 2004
    Quality Shared and VPS Hosting
    PHP 5.3.x & PHP 5.4.x & PHP 5.5.X & PHP 5.6.X & PHP 7.0.X Support!

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Location
    Atlanta
    Posts
    1,167
    The thread title here and on SlashDot is entirely misleading. Sun is not going to close source MySQL, keep your pants on

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Posts
    286
    Quote Originally Posted by cbtrussell View Post
    The thread title here and on SlashDot is entirely misleading. Sun is not going to close source MySQL, keep your pants on
    Yup. What Sun have actually said is that some new features will be developed that will be added only the the Enterprise line, not close off existing features.

    A better article on this would be this one:

    http://www.regdeveloper.co.uk/2008/0..._source_mysql/

    It's emerged Sun may release extra data back-up features in the Enterprise Edition of the next version of MySQL, due in Q4, to paying enterprise subscribers only.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    665
    They haven't written that they'd reduce the core of existing features though. So if you like MySQL and its community -- there's no reason to dump the RDBMS (in the vernacular, not mysqldump-ish ) in lieu of features that haven't yet made it into its source.
    That's plain crazy

    Sun is probably just trying to improve the quality of its new acquisition. By injecting funds into the mix, they create a catalyst to improvements that will trickle into builds used by community-edition users. Everyone wins.

    They just open sourced Java, Java3D, and a ton of other Java components. I don't think they're on the proprietary-train as a company..
    circlical - hosting software development
    forums * blog

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Proud She-Geek
    Posts
    1,722
    moved to programming discussion
    <?php echo "Signature here"; ?>

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Top Secret
    Posts
    11,687
    Sun is in business to make a profit. Obviously this means they'll have to close off some of the source to MySQL. It's really hard to make a profit when you're letting everyone see what's going on so openly.

    Does this mean they'll 'close' everything off? That's been addressed already. The title of this thread is simply designed to cause panic and spread misinformation, which it's done pretty well.

    As far as alternatives?
    Personally, I say give it time, don't jump ship quite yet. Sun has done extremely well with running java, and will do just the same with MySQL. Again, they need to make at least a BIT of profit here, so, yes, I find no fault in closing the 'elite' features off.

    When it comes down to support, I find that MySQL is supported by (virtually) every database application, while pgsl (the ugly stepchild) is not. I haven't run across an application I had any problems with MySQL with, but I'm running (personally) a good deal of applications that won't work well with pgsql at all, or even install on it. I'll keep a bit of faith in Sun, for now, until they show me they can't be trusted.
    WHMCS Guru - WHMCS addons, management, support and more.
    WHMCS Notifications Extended - Add slack, hipchat, SMS, pushover to WHMCS !!
    Always looking for Linux, WHMCS, Support Desk work. PM for details

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Lebanon
    Posts
    413
    uff thanks guys!! it was scary at the beginning then became better!

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    4,342
    They are only closing certain sections, more advanced sections that barely anyone uses.

    Peace,
    Testing 1.. Testing 1..2.. Testing 1..2..3...

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    829
    Though nothing says they wont do it in near future, so it may still be worthwhile in looking at alternatives so we are not all forced to migrate suddenly one day.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    California, USA
    Posts
    581
    More hosts should offer multiple database solutions for their customers.

    This could even be used as a selling point and wouldn't take too long to implement.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Lebanon
    Posts
    413
    so it may still be worthwhile in looking at alternatives so we are not all forced to migrate suddenly one day.
    No one will be be obliged to migrate suddenly everybody has mysql already on their servers and as long as you don't find an alternative you stay on it.

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Hollywood, CA
    Posts
    3,046
    Sun would be crazy to close source MySQL. In fact, Sun purchased MySQL with the sole intent of becoming a more open source company. MySQL will continue to be dually licensed as it has been for quite some time.

    Secondly if you look Jeremy Cole's blog you will see that MySQL(Marten Mickos) had planned on releasing this feature to enterprise customers before they were even acquired by Sun. Marten explains that without enterprise customers, MySQL would cease to exist which is true. Sometimes you have to throw your paying customers a bone...

    I'm under the impression most people who use MySQL in the enterprise such as my employer already have a solid backup/restore solution.

    When it comes to scaling and compliance, Postgres easily wins.

    http://tweakers.net/reviews/649/7/da...-pagina-7.html

  17. #17
    What would happen code bases available out there already? I am sure if the close source happens a new tanget will come up and become the new standadard like may be OpenMySQL.
    YIM: asifbiz skype: cubexsystems1

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Goleta, CA
    Posts
    5,550
    Read the actual articles on this they are close sourcing FUTURE SECTIONS not the entire code base.
    Patron: I'd like my free lunch please.
    Cafe Manager: Free lunch? Did you read the fine print stating it was an April Fool's joke.
    Patron: I read the same way I listen, I ignore the parts I don't agree with. I'm suing you for false advertising.
    Cafe Owner: Is our lawyer still working pro bono?

  19. #19
    The whole point of (correctly licensed) open source is that you can't close it, just because a new version is only available with a closed license doesn't mean the previous open version ceases to exist. Whether or not it ceases to be relevant or viable is another matter. However, Sun don't intend to do any of this so there is a second reason not to panic.

    As far as alternatives, I never understood why MySQL was so popular anyway. For years it was a dirty hack missing all sorts of features that meant it shouldn't even have been considered for reliable data retention. All the while PostgreSQL had everything you would expect from an enterprise class database and plenty more. Once again "good enough" and marketing prevails, speaking of which, the other thing MySQL had going for it was that it ran on Windows for a few years before PostgreSQL got there.

    Both systems have improved with time, MySQL getting some real RDBMS features and PostgreSQL getting some real speed improvements so the distinction is now a little less clear. People wanting the more capable system will still chose PostgreSQL, people wanting the more popular system will chose MySQL. Due to all the applications out there written against MySQL its popularity does count for a lot.

    Still, it is good to know that the open source database market it competitive, and no one is dropping out just yet.

    Jim
    Blue Room Hosting - High availability UK VPS
    KVM Plans - Multiple OS support. Virtual console and CD drive.

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Portugal
    Posts
    423
    I don't think PostgreSQL can be considered for a big (please not that big is not a database with 1 or 2 Gb...) transactional, business critical, project. For those projects you are likely to consider using MS Sql, Oracle, or, if your budget is not allowing it, MySql.

    The advantage of working with Sql Server or Oracle is that you have trully RDBMS enterprise oriented features, great performance, great support and, of course, you don't have to worry about this kind of issues.

    The disavantage? Well, the price, obviously. However, I can't go by without saying that most people forget to see the hidden costs of development. Most serious data-driven enterprise level applications can be developed in both Sql Server or Oracle in a fraction of the time of MySql. Also, the maintainence of the database throughout the project is much smoother.

    PS: I'm perfectly aware that not everyone would share this opinion.
    Software Project Manager and Architect
    .Net, SQL Server, PHP and MySql

  21. #21
    Odd, because when I was asked to evaluate Oracle alternatives for a very large, business critical, multi-merchant processing gateway in 1999 MySQL wasn't even ACID compliant (or maybe it didn't have transactions, my memory is hazy) and so was dropped without any further consideration. The only thing we found back then that measured up to the robustness, performance and feature set of Oracle was PostgreSQL, and we were not looking just at open source solutions.

    Maybe our difference of opinion is explained by a Windows vs UNIX background, I never looked at MS SQL because it doesn't run on UNIX and I also have no experience of how PostgreSQL behaves on Windows. If, as your .Net and SQL Server credentials in your signature suggest, you have more experience with Windows then I can see why PostgreSQL can seem like a new comer that has yet to prove itself. For all I know it may even have some serious flaws on this platform.

    On the UNIX side PostgreSQL has a long and distinguished history, I have used it for over 10 years, on one large system and lots of small projects, and have never experienced data loss, unexpected behaviour, or disappointment. This is why it remains my first choice, but since I don't evaluate databases anymore it is more of an assumption than a choice. My misgivings about MySQL go back 10 years, and although I know it has probably become viable in that time I don't have any experience to conclude that one way or another.

    I hope I don't sound like I am flaming, but if there are any reasons why PostgreSQL isn't suitable for the enterprise I would genuinely like to hear of them. Certainly I and my colleagues thought it was suitable in 1999, and I hope it has not gone downhill since, but if we missed anything it would be nice to find out.

    Jim
    Blue Room Hosting - High availability UK VPS
    KVM Plans - Multiple OS support. Virtual console and CD drive.

  22. #22
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Portugal
    Posts
    423
    Quote Originally Posted by blueroomhosting View Post
    Odd, because when I was asked to evaluate Oracle alternatives for a very large, business critical, multi-merchant processing gateway in 1999 MySQL wasn't even ACID compliant (or maybe it didn't have transactions, my memory is hazy) and so was dropped without any further consideration. The only thing we found back then that measured up to the robustness, performance and feature set of Oracle was PostgreSQL, and we were not looking just at open source solutions.

    Maybe our difference of opinion is explained by a Windows vs UNIX background, I never looked at MS SQL because it doesn't run on UNIX and I also have no experience of how PostgreSQL behaves on Windows. If, as your .Net and SQL Server credentials in your signature suggest, you have more experience with Windows then I can see why PostgreSQL can seem like a new comer that has yet to prove itself. For all I know it may even have some serious flaws on this platform.

    On the UNIX side PostgreSQL has a long and distinguished history, I have used it for over 10 years, on one large system and lots of small projects, and have never experienced data loss, unexpected behaviour, or disappointment. This is why it remains my first choice, but since I don't evaluate databases anymore it is more of an assumption than a choice. My misgivings about MySQL go back 10 years, and although I know it has probably become viable in that time I don't have any experience to conclude that one way or another.

    I hope I don't sound like I am flaming, but if there are any reasons why PostgreSQL isn't suitable for the enterprise I would genuinely like to hear of them. Certainly I and my colleagues thought it was suitable in 1999, and I hope it has not gone downhill since, but if we missed anything it would be nice to find out.

    Jim
    It sure doesn't sound as flaming.

    PostgreSQL, in my opinion, has a track record of features that are more compliant with standards than MySql. However, a note has to be made that most people judge MySql only by it's widespread storage engine MyISAM. There's a great deal of storage engines, that can be plugged into MySql, for all sorts of functionality, that go from ACID OLTP to data wharehousing.

    I'm not exactly sure about when MySql started to be ACID complient in their payed versions. This said, I can't argue if it was back in '99 or not

    None the less, back to PostgreSQL, all I have to say is that as with MySql, or any other product in IT, we have to analyse if it fits our business needs. For instance, if I have to develop a busy web portal with very low budget I'm prolly going to pick MySql over PostgreSQL, even with the latest buzz arround Sun decisions regarding MySql.

    I don't know... It just seems like a database that has always been behind when it comes to performance.

    Maybe I'm wrong, maybe I'm not. Perhaps I'll take this a as motto to go and test it in linux again
    Software Project Manager and Architect
    .Net, SQL Server, PHP and MySql

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •