Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Sun May Begin Close Sourcing MySQL Features

Posted by samzenpus on from the closing-up dept.

An anonymous reader writes "From the MySQL User's Conference, Sun has announced, and former CEO Marten Mickos has confirmed, that Sun will be close sourcing sections of the MySQL code base. Sun will begin with close sourcing the backup solutions to MySQL, and will continue with more advanced features. With Oracle owning Innodb, and it being GPL, does this mean that MySQL will be removing it to introduce these features? Sun has had a very poor history of actually open sourcing anything."

35 of 509 comments (clear)

  1. This is great news.... by poet · · Score: 5, Insightful

    For PostgreSQL :) http://www.postgresql.org/

    Would you like another round of ammo with that foot gun Sun?

    --
    Get your PostgreSQL here: http://www.commandprompt.com/
    1. Re:This is great news.... by Daniel+Dvorkin · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I used to be one of MySQL's vociferous defenders, arguing that speed, ease of use, quality of documentation, and the size of the community made up for its limitations relative to PostgreSQL. But this is pretty much the end. Sun is clearly determined to destroy whatever's good about it. For small, lightweight projects, SQLite is the way to go, and for anything bigger, PostgreSQL is now the clear choice. I guess it's time to see if PostgreSQL's documentation and tools have managed to get any less user-hostile over the years.

      The one remaining question is mindshare. For example, pretty much every ISP offers MySQL as part of a basic hosting package. No one's saying they have to stop doing that, but are they going to start offering other open source DBMSs in the same way now? I sure hope so.

      --
      The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
    2. Re:This is great news.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Close sourcing is never good news for anyone...
      Tell that to the Chinese. We lost our manufacturing base to them. They source all of our close we wear nowadays.
    3. Re:This is great news.... by MadnessASAP · · Score: 5, Funny
      Even nicer PostreSQL has an animal mascot, I can see the jokes now: A Penguin, Indian and Elephant walk into a bar...

      We even still get a pronounceable acronym LAPP. It looks like the future is still rosy for the rest of us.

      --
      I may agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to face the consequences of saying it.
    4. Re:This is great news.... by Registered+Coward+v2 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      For PostgreSQL :) http://www.postgresql.org/

      Would you like another round of ammo with that foot gun Sun? From the pSQL web page:

      Best of all, PostgreSQL's source code is available under the most liberal open source license: the BSD license. This license gives you the freedom to use, modify and distribute PostgreSQL in any form you like, open or closed source. Any modifications, enhancements, or changes you make are yours to do with as you please. As such, PostgreSQL is not only a powerful database system capable of running the enterprise, it is a development platform upon which to develop in-house, web, or commercial software products that require a capable RDBMS.

      That seems to be the same thing Sun is saying - we're going to add some closed source features to MySQL; the same as pSQL's license allows.
      --
      I'm a consultant - I convert gibberish into cash-flow.
    5. Re:This is great news.... by Cecil · · Score: 5, Informative

      Having a good bit of experience with both, I'd say that the documentation and overall support structure for PG is about the same as MySQL these days.

      The only caveat that typically hangs up new users (especially ones coming from a MySQL background) and is not particularly clearly documented is the default authentication mechanism.

      By default (at least on many distributions), Postgres uses "ident" authentication, which means no password is required for database logins on a local socket. What *is* required, on the other hand, is that you must be logged in/running as the UNIX user of same name. Obviously this poses problems for webapps that want their own database user and is generally just very confusing for users who are used to the database having its own independent set of usernames and passwords (which Postgres still does, for remote connections... causing further confusion)

      Of course, like any good database Postgres will be more than happy to handle its own user authentication entirely natively, you simply have to use md5 instead of ident in pg_hba.conf

      --
      Random and weird software I've written.
    6. Re:This is great news.... by rainhill · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Guy n Gals.. Lets just fork the thing.., then we can call it iSQL

    7. Re:This is great news.... by penix1 · · Score: 5, Informative

      Just one line for you...

      http://phppgadmin.sourceforge.net/

      --
      This is a sig. This is only a sig. Had this been an actual sig you would have been informed where to tune for more sigs.
    8. Re:This is great news.... by Sancho · · Score: 5, Funny

      Eh, Linux is ok on the desktop, but for servers, I really prefer FreeBSD.

      Sometimes I get tired of that, and use NetBSD for a while. A short stint with NetBSD, Apache, Postgresql, and PHP usually refreshes me long enough so that I can FreeBSD, Apache, Postgresql, and PHP again.

    9. Re:This is great news.... by Sancho · · Score: 5, Funny

      That would be the joke, but I was going for a touch more subtlety.

    10. Re:This is great news.... by kestasjk · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I used to be one of MySQL's vociferous defenders, arguing that speed, ease of use, quality of documentation, and the size of the community made up for its limitations relative to PostgreSQL. But this is pretty much the end. Sun is clearly determined to destroy whatever's good about it. PostgreSQL is definitely better in terms of being free.
      • No one company owns it; it's added to by individual companies which need additions, so no-one can buy it out and stomp it out
      • No one company dominates support; you can go wherever you get the best price/service, and there's no incentive to try and get you to need support
      • No dual licensing; it's all BSD licensed, which means if you want to take it and close the source for a commercial project you can. If you think you can take Postgres, close source it, and improve it to the extend that people would pay for it, then good luck to you (but I don't see it happening ;) ). More likely you'd want to embed Postgres, or extend it somehow and not have to worry about licensing or pay fees, and with Postgres (as with SQLite) you can.
      So from a licensing perspective PostgreSQL is definitely a good deal safer.

      For the web I started off with Postgres but eventually had to move to MySQL because it has such wide support, but as I use InnoDB I've grown more and more uneasy at seeing Oracle and Sun buy off chunks of MySQL.
      Even putting aside any arguments about performance/features (not that Postgres is bad in this regard), PostgreSQL would be better as an FOSS DB standard, just because there wouldn't be any worries about license/ownership instability.


      However, before we go nuts with Postgres love, I think it's safe to say Sun won't be close sourcing MySQL to a damaging degree; that'd be like killing the goose that lays the golden egg.
      The reason MySQL is so valuable is because of its wide usage, and they'll want to use that to their advantage in more subtle ways than close sourcing and cashing in. The comments so far have been a bit OTT.
      --
      // MD_Update(&m,buf,j);
    11. Re:This is great news.... by Kristoph · · Score: 5, Interesting

      But this is pretty much the end.

      You need to get a grip and possibly read for yourself what this is.

      Sun is saying that they may (not yet decided) offer some add on components to mySQL backup that may (not yet decided) use a license other than GPL. The add on in question will be integrated through a backup API mySQL has for exactly this purpose (to enable 3rd party extended backup solutions).

      What exactly do see wrong with that? First, nothing precludes building open source backup solutions for this API and nothing precludes other 3rd parties from building other solutions. Why should Sun not have the same right?

      ]{

    12. Re:This is great news.... by Kennon · · Score: 5, Funny
      Or how about: OurSQL...bitches.

      yeah the whole thing.

      --
      "All those moments, will be lost in time...like tears in rain..."
    13. Re:This is great news.... by debrain · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Are you seriously complaining about the fact that 3rd party tools don't give you WYSIWYG support for triggers, something that you can control entirely by simply writing a query? No. I'm complaining about the fact that, for example, phpMySql requires you to type the following to view the triggers on your database:

      SELECT TRIGGER_NAME, EVENT_MANIPULATION, EVENT_OBJECT_TABLE, ACTION_STATEMENT
          FROM INFORMATION_SCHEMA.TRIGGERS
          WHERE TRIGGER_SCHEMA='dbname';
      Let alone, ALTER/UPDATE statements.

      Alternatively, here's what I do in phpPgAdmin: click Table, click Triggers. There's a list. I can edit it by clicking on a specific trigger. phpMySql has no such interface to triggers, and every view, creation and edit must be done by manually typing in the SQL (but, based on the tone of your reply, I'm sure you knew that). Maybe you have time for that, and it's not a big concern (on what terms do you get paid?). For any serious database development, it strikes me as a grotesque waste of time.

      I mean, seriously, the CREATE TRIGGER statement is not rocket science. Nobody implied that it was. However, complex trigger statements are what beget the necessity of being able to edit them handily- something that I would imagine you couldn't do with a WYSIWYG (exactly what would a WYSIWYG TRIGGER editor do, anyway?). Wasting 15-20 minutes typing the SELECT/CREATE/ALTER TRIGGERS statement in another editor and then running a blanket update over the whole SQL database strikes me as fundamentally wrong, especially where there is a trivial and effective interface in phpPgAdmin.

      Besides, creating them programatically is just better business. I can keep a db_setup_triggers.sql in source control and make it part of automatic builds. Who ever suggested or implied that you wouldn't create them programatically? Please, feel free to describe how else you would do it.

      MySQL is far from perfect. But to criticize it for THIS? I think you're fundamentally confused about what I was criticizing, meaning you either did not take the time to read my comments, are ignorant of MySql/phpMySql, and/or didn't take the time to think about either before you started ranting. If that be the case and you are fundamentally confused, you've contributed little if anything to the discussion, sounded condescending, acted presumptuously, and been indignant about something that does not even exist (a criticism about the lack of a TRIGGER WYSIWYG, the very suggestion of which reeks of ignorance). If indeed that is the case, next time you consider writing something, perhaps you could do us all a favour and not.

  2. Re:Not that I begrudge them a right to make a buck by andersbergh · · Score: 5, Informative

    That's not what the linked blog post says, basically what they're doing is developing new features to be put in MySQL 6.0 enterprise, and these _new_ features won't show up in community.

  3. harsh judgement by irtza · · Score: 5, Insightful

    didn't sun buy star office and give us the OPEN SOURCE - openoffice.org?

    given the size and nature of this move, I don't begrudge sun anything in its commitment to open source.

    --
    When all else fails, try.
    1. Re:harsh judgement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      quiet! stop ruining my argument with facts

    2. Re:harsh judgement by Alpha830RulZ · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Java is pretty neat, too.

      I do like NetBeans.

      --
      I was taught to respect my elders. The trouble is, it's getting harder and harder to find some.
    3. Re:harsh judgement by An+dochasac · · Score: 5, Interesting
      java not full open source

      Where have you been? Java source code has been available for a long time but after years of people complaining that it wasn't "free enough", Sun fully released Java under a GPL 2 years ago.

      OpenOffice not really GPL

      O.K. so it's LGPL So what, so is Gtk, most of GNOME and probably 80% of what you and joe-sixpack considers to be "opensource" in "Linux". GPL is just one license. GPL was never fully tested in court and doesn't provide patent indemnity as CDDL does. I'd be happier if Java, OpenOffice and MySQL were CDDL but there would be too much gnashing of teeth from the Linux creationists.

      OpenSolaris i dont know enough about

      OpenSolaris is licensed under CDDL. Look here for an FAQ which explains in simple terms why CDDL is superior to GPL.



  4. Last part a Joke? by gQuigs · · Score: 5, Informative

    OpenOffice.org - no mention eh. :P
    Java - I am running the IcedTea free software version right now
    OpenSolaris - might not be GPL, but it still qualifies as free software... right?

    Of course I'm hoping the first part is a joke too.

    1. Re:Last part a Joke? by junglee_iitk · · Score: 5, Insightful

      That when RMS himself says that Sun is the biggest single corporate contributor to open source.

      Slashdot's credibility is drowning.

  5. Comment by Rinisari · · Score: 5, Informative
    Marten replied already:

    Marten Mickos Says:
    April 16th, 2008 at 17:28:26

    Thanks for all your comments on our business model. I wanted to present here the quick facts around this to avoid misunderstandings:

    In 6.0 there will be native backup functionality in the server available for anyone and all (Community, Enterprise) under GPL.

    Additionally we will develop high-end add-ons (such as encryption, native storage engine-specific drivers) that we will deliver to customers in the MySQL Enterprise product only. We have not yet decided under what licence we will release those add-ons (GPL, some other FOSS licence, and/or commercial).

    Because the main backup functionality goes into the main server under GPL, anyone can of course use the api and build their own add-ons or other modifications.

    Marten
    --
    Colin Dean Go a year without DRM
  6. -1, Flamebait by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Sun has had a very poor history of actually open sourcing anything.

    That's rubbish. The article claiming OpenSolaris isn't really open source bases it on the lack of community and ideology. I'm sorry, but if you want ideology, then it's Free Software you're after, not open source.

    OpenSolaris is definitely open source, and Sun don't have a poor history of open sourcing things. Anybody who says otherwise has an axe to grind.

  7. What the hell? by joe_bruin · · Score: 5, Informative

    Sun has had a very poor history of actually open sourcing anything Yes, let's forget about Java, that was recently GPL'd. Or Open Solaris, including ZFS. Or Open Office. Or OpenSPARC (you can download and implement their latest processors). Or Netbeans (and Forte before that, though it was lousy). Or being a patron of the FSF.

    Those guys are such dicks, they never give the community anything.
  8. Sun to Begin Close Sourcing MySQL by brianc · · Score: 5, Funny

    Oh, no they don't. They can't do that to MySQL.

    They can do it to TheirSQL, but not MySQL...

    --


    SIGLOST && SIGUNUSED && SIGQUIT
  9. Comments from MySQL by martenmickos · · Score: 5, Informative

    Thanks for all the comments on this. We are listening attentively. Let me clarify some facts:

    * The business decision on this was made by MySQL AB (by me as the then CEO) prior to the acquisition by Sun, so this has nothing to do with Sun. On the contrary, Sun is more likely to influence this decision the other way.

    * It is not a quesiton of close sourcing any existing code, nor anything in the core server. Everything we have released under GPL continues to be under GPL, and the core server will always be under GPL (or some other FOSS licence).

    * We will introduce backup functionality for all users (Community and Enterprise) under GPL in version 6.0.

    * Additionally we will develop high-end add-ons (such as encryption, native storage engine-specific drivers) that we will deliver to customers in the MySQL Enterprise product only. We have not yet decided under what licence we will release those add-ons (GPL, some other FOSS licence, and/or commercial).

    * At all times, because the main backup functionality goes into the core server under GPL, anyone can of course use the api and build their own add-ons or other modifications.

    Those are the facts on this. The interesting topic is of course the one of the business model and what the best business model for FOSS software is. I hope to cover that in a separate posting.

    In all of this, you have our undivided continued commitment to providing a fantastic and complete MySQL server under GPL for anyone to download and use. If we for whatever reason would not do that, we would risk losing users to other open source databases or risk seeing a fork of our own product. This is the power of open source.

    Make sense?

    Marten
    previously CEO of MySQL, now SVP at Sun

    1. Re:Comments from MySQL by pembo13 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If this is true, could the editors please alter the article title accordingly? Or at least point directly to the above comment? These articles get indexed.

      --
      "Thanks for all the money you paid to us. We've used it to buy off ISO among other things" -Microsoft
    2. Re:Comments from MySQL by cynicsreport · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Thanks for all the comments on this. We are listening attentively. Let me clarify some facts:
      .....
      Marten previously CEO of MySQL, now SVP at Sun

      I didn't actually read any of the points - the mere fact that he posted a comment on slashdot proves that Sun is committed to open source.
      When was last time Bill Gates posted a reply on slashdot?
      --
      - Demosthenes
      cynicsreport.com
    3. Re:Comments from MySQL by scribblej · · Score: 5, Funny

      He posts here all the time! You just have to browse at -1...

  10. MySQL & FOSS by martenmickos · · Score: 5, Insightful

    All,

    I tried to clarify the facts in another posting a moment ago: http://developers.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=525246&cid=23098626

    Here I will discuss the business model considerations, MySQL's commitment to Free and Open Source Software (FOSS), and why we made the decision we made.

    First and foremost: we at MySQL firmly believe that open source is a superior way of producing software. You get better quality faster, and you often get better innovation too.

    So it is not lightly that we have decided a few times to produce non-open software, such as the MySQL Monitor introduced some years ago. So why do we do that?

    The reason is that we have an ambition not only to produce FOSS code, but also to be a profitable business that can exist for a long time. Each time we make more money, we hire more developers to develop GPL code.

    If the world were perfect, we would only produce GPL code and we would have a great business that cna fund the software development. But we have found that the world is not perfect. We have been experimenting with a variety of business models around FOSS (dual licensing, support only, simple subscriptions, different binaries for community and enterprise, non-open source features) to find the best one. And we will continue to experiment until we are satisfied. We need to find a model that allows us to produce a ton of great code under GPL while having the financial strength to do all this.

    To get to this goal of ours, we believe we have to be more pragmatic than dogmatic. Call it a necessary evil if you like. Having production add-ons that we provide only to paying customers currently seems to use to be a useful model. Our partners and customers think it is great. Many users think it is great. But not all do (as evident from this thread on /.). I would hope we could please all, but I am afraid we cannot.

    In all of this - i.e. as we experiment with open source business models (as there aren't really any role models bigger than ourselves that we could learn from) - we remain fully committed to producing the core database server always under the GPL (or some other approved FOSS licence).

    In this work, we feel we have been able to produce enormous benefits to the world in the form of GPL software. The MySQL server could not have evolved as much as it did (not that I am saying it has evolved perfectly) if we hadn't had a revenue stream to fund the hiring of developers and others. We have open sourced MySQL Cluster which was an advanced closed-source database engine at Ericsson. We open sourced the Falcon storage engine.

    I can appreciate that many of you are upset with our decisions. It has happened before that the community has been upset with us. But I hope that you can see that

    * we are trying to be fully open and transparent with our decision-making in these areas

    * we have a full commitment to produce the core MySQL server under GPL

    * we are actively listening to your input

    We can probably not please all, but you should know that we are trying to serve our community. We are immensely thankful for all the support and contributions that we have received in our 13-year history. We are hoping that we are good stewards of the MySQL phenomenon, and we hope that you can come to terms with the fact that we find revenue generation a vital part of our mission.

    We may not have come up with the perfect business model yet (and perhaps the decision that is here being debated was utterly stupid), but we are determined to continue to seek the perfect business model for open source software so that we can continue to exist and be strong, and so that other software entrepreneurs can learn from our successes and mistakes.

    Finally, please note that this entire decision and reasoning is something we developed on our own at MySQL AB several months ago, before being acquired by Sun. Sun has not asked us to do this or that. Or in fact, Sun has asked us the opposite - i.e. whether we should not

  11. Is anyone actually reading TFA? by FliesLikeABrick · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Looking at the actual link, this is talking about select _new_ features. The /. summary clearly is trying to scare us all into thinking that existing parts of MySQL would somehow be turned into a closed-source product.

    Talk about someone trying to be misleading...

  12. mrghemp by MrGHemp · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The title of this article is a bit dramatic and incorrect. There is nothing in the story about the core MySQL engine being moved from open source to a closed source mentioned in the story. Rather a fancy new backup add-on is being released to Enterprise edition, and possibly added to the community version later.

    MySQL is one of the most popular open source products out there, but they get lambasted if they create an add-on and want to actually get paid for it. Too many ppl react as if they are defecating on a holy shrine in the land of FOSS.

    The title of this article and some of the reactions here strikes me a chicken little "the sky is falling" BS. I love open source software and the general movement, but I hate it when people jump to conclusions like this... and jumping to conclusions like this seems to happen all to often by ppl on /. and the open source community in general. I'd like to see more people showing respect for a company that has done so much for open source and respect the fact that they deserve to actually make a little money along the way.

    I can't help but wonder how many of the people, who treat this story like the evil Sun is going ruin MySQL, run MySQL but haven't open sourced the programs that they've written that access the database... I'd bet a hell of a lot of closed source programs use MySQL as their database... should we scream at them for being evil too?

  13. The summary is bad... by steelfood · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ...the editors can't even be bothered to read the link and verify the information.

    I went to firehose to vote this story down with the reason "not the best". I suggest we all start doing this for all such examples of yellow journalism. Maybe if we do it enough, the editors will start to get a clue.

    --
    "If a nation expects to be ignorant and free in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be."
  14. Re:wait a minute.... by mabhatter654 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    but it's backwards of the Red Hat way. With Fedora, Red Hat lets the community run the roost and run whatever crazy things are cool on the tubes. They reserve RHEL for the cleaned up professional version that has what paying customers NEED and they support it. The community gets the warty version with all the lumps in return for it being free.

    Sun wants to treat MySQL like a product. They want to give away the "free" version as a stripped down marketing tool. They want to put new code in Enterprise first, where fewer people will see it. The current model is that Enterprise is MORE stable and less agressive. The value of the GPL version is that lots of people put up with warts because it's free... paying customers won't do that by a long shot. The first time a nasty data killing bug shows up for the top paying customers they'll all jump ship for Sun not testing better.

  15. Bad summary by headLITE · · Score: 5, Informative

    The /. summary is misleading. It isn't MySQL that is going to be closed-sourced, it's just that Sun will develop additional products that MySQL customers will be able to buy and use with their GPL MySQL server if they so choose. This isn't really news, MySQL AB has done so before, for example with the most excellent MySQL Enterprise Monitor.