Gov't GSA Office goes MySQL
comforteagle writes "MySQL has won a five year contract with the US General Services Administration office putting it in yet another government office on top of NASA, the Dept. of Def., Los Alamos National Labs & the Census Bureau. This additional win allows around 70 Government customers to purchase and deploy MySQL."
What exactly are they paying for?
What stopped them from deploying MySQL before?
Agreed. I work for DISA, and generally the most exotic thing I see a year is 2-3 deployments of Postgres (whihc is great on its own). It will be interesting to see if it gets any penetration within the DOD arena, more so if the amount is enough to require STIG documentation.
MySQL is on the GSA schedule - but thousands upon thousands of products are available on the GSA schedule. Just being on the GSA schedule isn't particularly dramatic, though. And the headline (and even the summary) are quite a bit more breathless and quite a bit less accurate than the real story.
-h-
Jim Winstead will be speaking at SCALE 4x. He will cover the new features in MySQL 5.0 and 5.1. You can get a discount on a full access pass using the promo code "NEWSP" or a free expo floor pass using "FREE".
Aye, subselects have been supported since 4.1.
Personally I believe MySQL won the popularity vote against postgreSQL due to better performance because it didn't have as many features, as MySQL adds these features the performance will get worse than postgres who have had the features since the beginning and have been working mainly on reliability/performance.
I know which I'd choose.
Time is an illusion. Lunchtime doubly so. - Douglas Adams
China. What has the DoD done for me lately?
I guess Oracle will feel relieved with their 'ISO SQL 92 minus datatypes and a few other essentials' product.
I'm sure Larry Ellison cries every evening as he swims through his five-story Money Bin.
Oracle has decided that it would be worse to break all the legacy applications already running on Oracle DBs than to force compliance with the ISO standard. Can't say I blame them.
Bingo! You hit the nail on the head. Support and the ability to hide/bury/dispose of the source code is important and worth the money spent. The open source nature the other side of the software has provides faster development and vetting of errors faster (typically) than closed source software.
As for the cost, often the gov't goes to extremes to keep the cost low even while maintaining certain specs to ensure safety and reliability of equipent in harsh environments. I work in the Aquisition field and understand the reasons why somethings seems to be far too costly at face value. Yes, in the past there have been people skimming off the top and pocketing some money, however the way aquisition occurs now, that has been minimized if not eliminated. Oh, and yes, some items still appear to cost too much, until you find out the specs that must be met and you learn that some companies that sell to the gov't make very small margins of profit just to have a contract that may last ten years or so to ensure a steady source of income.