Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

MySQL to Adopt Solid Storage Engine

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the solid-gone-baby dept.

hmart writes "As seen on ZDNet's Open Source Blog MySQL is taking another step to defend from Oracle's recent acquisitions of InnoBase and Sleepycat. From the article: 'MySQL responds by getting Solid Information Technology, a proprietary database vendor, to take its solidDB Storage Engine for MySQL open source, under the GPL, starting in June.'"

10 of 267 comments (clear)

  1. This is good news by IntelliAdmin · · Score: 4, Interesting

    It seems that Oracle is not taking the threat from MySQL lightly. The purchases they have made have been quite public, but they also have been quietly hiring developers from many different open source projects. It is scary how many of them have dropped off the radar. On a side note: I was always under the impression that MySQL was a 'amateur' database. I was very surprised when I was forced to switch from Microsoft SQL 2000 - MySQL had a much smaller memory footprint, and the performance just blew me away. To this day I still cannot believe the performance difference. It really speaks to the power of Open Source.

    1. Re:This is good news by Tablizer · · Score: 2, Interesting

      It seems that Oracle is not taking the threat from MySQL lightly. The purchases they have made have been quite public, but they also have been quietly hiring developers from many different open source projects. It is scary how...

      Seems to me that Postgresql would be a bigger threat because its SQL convensions are closer to Oracle's. Postgre would be easier for Oracle shops to convert or transition to.

      --
      Table-ized A.I.
    2. Re:This is good news by Antony+T+Curtis · · Score: 5, Interesting
      Anyway, on a lighter note, this new engine looks pretty hot, and like it could take MySQL in a lot of directions that I never really foresaw it going.


      I think it would be fun to make MySQL as versatile as possible with a huge choice of plug-ins available. Sort of like what Linux is for operating systems but for databases instead. MySQL is platform agnostic and want it to perform well everywhere, including Microsoft Windows and even... SCO (hey, its not their customer's fault).

      If there is anyone out there which has some kind of data storage/retreval system, I am sure that MySQL would be happy to assist and encourage them to make it into a storage engine for MySQL. If they want to GPL their code and join the open-source party, I am sure MySQL would be happy to help in that too.
      --
      No sig. Move along - nothing to see here.
    3. Re:This is good news by drDugan · · Score: 4, Interesting

      PostgreSQL is a much bigger long term threat to Oracle than MySQL. The one place where Oracle still has an advantage over FOS projects is in big iron and big databases. PostreSQL has closed that gap significantly where (I believe) MySQL never will. It simply will not serve the market need that Oracle meets now.

    4. Re:This is good news by Myen · · Score: 2, Interesting

      On the other hand, your important OSS people have also see OSS code before being hired by Oracle...

      I am starting to think they whole "tainting" jig is getting stupid.

    5. Re:This is good news by Nutria · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I think that everyone's like "ok, we kind of win the web browser wars... lets move to Office," the difference is, firefox really is better than IE. Can you really say that OpenOffice is better than MS Office?

      Ah, ok. I was just curious as to your thought process.

      As to whether I think that OOo2 is better than MSO 97 (that's all I have), well, it's hard to say. Word 97 & Excel 97 are very snappy on my Win2k 933MHz/256MB RAM laptop, and OOo2 is really snappy on my Sempron-754 2800+/1GB RAM PC and does everything I and my wife want.

      Why don't I use OOo2 on my laptop? MSO 97 is already there, is snappy, and I have to use Outlook anyway at work.

      --
      "I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
  2. More Info? by logicnazi · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Does anyone know where I can find more info on the sorts of options/features this storage enginge supports?

    For that matter can anyone point me somewhere which describes the deliniation of responsibilities between generic MySQL code and the storage engines? In particular is MySQL just an SQL query parser/optimizer stuck on top of storage engines?

    --

    If you liked this thought maybe you would find my blog nice too:

  3. Re:Here's an idea.. . Develop your own! by Gothmolly · · Score: 2, Interesting

    And lets all be glad that MSSQL is secretly Sybase under the covers. Because of this we have the beautiful FreeTDS packages for Perl that happily talk to MS SQL server. Those of us stranded in MS shops can actually work this way, imagine the bloodshed if MSSQL was completely proprietary!

    --
    I want to delete my account but Slashdot doesn't allow it.
  4. postgres by jdew · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Hmmm, any real reason why they don't just take postgresql and use that as their backend?

  5. Self reply: perl DBI licensing info by XaXXon · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I found this page which states that DBD::mysql uses the MySQL client libraries (It says this for Net::MySQL).

    If you perldoc DBD::mysql, it says it's licensed under the same license as perl (the artistic license).

    Unless DBD::mysql is saying that their code is licensed under the artistic license, but as soon as it's built against the MySQL client library it becomes GPL (and just leaving out the last part), I don't see how the MySQL client libraries could possibly be GPL only. .. Any takers?