Slashdot Mirror
MySQL Outpacing Oracle In Wake of Acquisition
snydeq writes "Results from the 2010 Eclipse User Survey reveal interesting trends surrounding open source usage and opinions, writes InfoWorld's Savio Rodrigues. Linux usage among developers is on the rise, at the expense of Windows, and MySQL has pulled ahead of Oracle, by a factor of 3-to-2, as the database of choice among Eclipse developers. 'The data demonstrate that fears surrounding Oracle's control over MySQL have not resulted in lower use of MySQL in favor of an alternative open source database,' Rodrigues writes."
I like Oracle, its products and technologies and I am glad that its opensource products are gaining sales. I wish good luck to Oracle.
What a non-story.
You use Oracle because you *have to*. Not because it is pretty.
Saying MySQL has pulled ahead of Oracle is like saying that claw hammers have pulled ahead of pneumatic hammers mounted on giant excavators.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
An InfoWorld submitter submits a non-story about Oracle/MySQL on Slashdot. A Slashvertisement for an advertisement.
I'm sure "SlashdotMedia" will improve on all the wonders that Dice Holdings blessed us all with
Now that MySQL is in the firm hand of Oracle, what can Oracle do in the future to either suppress MySQL's progress or merge it with its money-sucking schemes?
More interesting (to me, at least) -- despite all the talk about how awesome git is, svn usage was more or less unchanged, increasing from 57.5 to 58.3%. Git went from 2.4% to 6.8%.
Do you even lift?
These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.
11%...edging out ms sql server! Postgres 9.0 has built in replication -- it will be interesting to see how that affects its share of the open source db space.
The 'fears' surrounding Oracle's acquisition of MySQL hadn't stopped people from using it because let's be honest; most developers don't know about that/don't know the consequences/aren't familiar with other free databases. The developers, much like the users they like to call 'lusers'; also look for convenience and try to work in what they're familiar with. That's why many developers who know very well Microsoft's ways still use their technologies; it's what they're used to and change takes time and adaptation efforts. The past few months since the acquisition have been filled with news about Apple, Apple, Google, Apple vs Amazon, Apple vs Adobe, Microsoft, Apple vs Google... It's no wonder many developers don't even KNOW about Oracle acquiring Sun.
It is definitely great to know that MySQL is doing great even in Oracle's hands and even Linux is growing in Eclipse User Survey. However, the title of the post is totally misleading as it is merely based on Eclipse User survey and that too with merely 1696 users. Nearly 40% of the respondents came merely from Germany and France (The survey believes this shouldn't bias result but we really have no reason to believe their assumption).
Hmm. I guess Slashdot stores it's comments in CLOBs, then.
What a depressingly stupid machine.
* - The Visual Studio Express editions don't allow you to redistribute very easily. Yeah, I tried installing the some of the runtimes and other things that it requires but I've never gotten an app I've written to work on another machine.
I managed to do that in 2005 with express visual c/c++ when playing with quake3 code to give modified engines to friends etc. Wasn't too much trouble so probably just something minor wrong
F/OSS dev tools on Windows just don't work well (there was so much shit that wouldn't work together well that I gave up) ;
It works well but I readily admit it can be an absolute pain in the ass to setup, again this was some time ago, perhaps 2004'ish, since 2006 was the last time I dual booted to windows for playing around.
>Usage of Windows by developers declined from 64.3 percent in 2009 to 58.3 percent in 2010 we have to take this with a pinch of salt - it was a survey of Eclipse users. That's like surveying alcoholics on whether they drink beer or not.
Open Source Drum Kit, LPLC deve board - mjhdesigns.com
"MySQL has pulled ahead of Oracle, by a factor of 3-to-2, as the database of choice among Eclipse developers." You can be sure there are some Oracle sales and marketing guys who are livid at this. They see every MySQL user as money out their pocket (because of reduced bonus). These guys usually have a lot of clout with the corporate execs and they are going to be lobbying to reduce the the competition from MySQL. In my company the sr execs will do some dumb stuff (e. g., things that hurt the long term, infavor of the short term) to keep the sales and marketing guys happy. I suspect there are plenty of Oracle sales guys who would like to kill MySQL today, if not sooner.
Don't blame the tools for your inability to use them correctly.
Thank you, I finally found out what tldr stands for.
"MySQL Outpacing Oracle Among Eclipse Developers In Wake of Acquisition"
Of course, that headline isn't particularly newsworthy. As the article cited states "it would be a stretch to say that these results from the 457 respondents represent the overall market".
$549 is nothing if you plan on selling your software. Assuming you charged $20 for a copy of your software, you would need to sell only 28 copies to make back the difference you spent on the IDE. That's nothing. You'll spend more on the computer to run it, almost as much on the OS, and more on electricity to power the computer. Most developers will earn $500 in a couple days, many in just 1 day. For hobby development at home, it's expensive. But if you actually are selling software, the cost is almost negligible.
Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
There's no difference between an app made with VS Express and VS Pro. All you need is to install .NET 4.0 on the target machine. Thats it.
You seriously have to be brain dead to fail at that. I probably have over 100 distinct apps of all kind, ranging from windows services to web applications, going by noob command line apps and everything in between, across 15 companies and most continents, and countless customers, with all versions of visual studio (including express and ultimate), and literally: there's no difference unless you have third party dependencies. The apps "Just work"
The apps "Just work"
except that with .NET 4.0, it uses a different CLR version (the first since .NET became popular), so a lot of apps that were built using .NET 1.1, 2.0 or 3.5 will not work with your app.
The more I use .NET, the more I find its a PITA, there's too many dependancies and funny ways of referencing different dlls. Why they couldn't just use "current directory, GAC, path" for searching, for example, is crazy. When something goes wrong, for a complex piece of software (and that's what I do, multi-million LoC apps) then .NET is more of a nuisance than you could ever believe.
You could not be more wrong about:
Oracle needs to drop the high prices, the competition in the market now doesnt allow them to have those prices.
An this is why...
It's called support. One of the major reasons I recommend Oracle to clients who need maximum uptime and downtime is just not an option is because of the world class support Oracle provides. If you are a licensed Oracle site you have support 24/7/365 no matter what time zone or country you happen to be in. If you pick up the phone and say those magic words, "I'm down" the calvary is not just coming over the hill they are at your door. Guess what that kind of support costs a lot of money to provide.
In our race to the bottom of the price bucket lots of things have to be cut and guess where they cut first, you guessed it, in support. With Oracle support you do not get script readers in India or the Philippines you get an Oracle engineer on the phone ready to tackle the problem with you until the problem is solved and they will bring in whatever other resources are required.
MySQL is a wonder database that does what it does very well, but would I put it up in a mission critical bit of infrastructure? Not on a bet. Those companies that have, eg: Sales Force and the like have had to hire LOTS of engineers/developers to handle MySQL in big installations and that costs even more.
Postgre has no such level of support either. So when you missions critical DB goes south either you better be able to fix it or you had better have a lot of friends you can wake up in the middle of the night.
Hey KID! Yeah you, get the fuck off my lawn!
tldr doesn't apply to novels. somebody will read it all, and I expect we'll have a book review on oprah this coming week.
The apps "Just work"
You're saying I can take an .exe compiled with an Express edition and just run it on another machine?
Nope.
I got a shit load of .dll and manifest errors that I could never get to work. And it's not me.
RIP America
July 4, 1776 - September 11, 2001
Don't blame the tools for your inability to use them correctly.
That's bullshit and you know it and it's that attitude that gives IT people a reputation of being immature and arrogant .
When I had those problems I googled quite a bit and you know what? The problems I mentioned are very common; which means that it's a design and implementation problem with all of those development tools.
So, I am blaming the tools for their poor design. You can be as condescending and insulting all you want but it doesn't change the fact that the tools have problems.
RIP America
July 4, 1776 - September 11, 2001
Would a normal Oracle customer really get better technical support from Oracle than from the postgresql mailing list? So far you often get useful answers directly from the Postgresql development team[1]. For that level of Oracle support I bet you'd have to pay higher than the normal already high prices, or be a big customer.
;).
Some guy to rushing to my door to quickly not be able to fix the problem, is often useful for keeping the bosses at bay, but not so useful from a technical POV. It is an often critically important feature though - being able to spend the company's money to help keep your job
[1] I doubt this scales though e.g. if Postgresql's popularity skyrockets...
If they really need world class support, then they ought to use db2 - its better than Oracle in every dimension, even if you include Larry Ellison's yacht.
If they just need something that works properly, then Postgresql will solve their problems.
Disclaimer: I have frequently been a victim of Oracle since Oracle 5.
Sent from my ASR33 using ASCII
.NET 4.0 breaks backward compatibility to some extent, yes. Except thats not what I was replying to. I was replying to a post saying that Visual Studio Professional was required because apps made with Express couldn't easily be deployed and thats bullshit =P
And Fusion works very much the way you described it. GAC -> Current dir in a couple different ways (Path would have been nice i guess). There's only a "lot of different ways" of referencing DLLs at compile times. At runtime it is very, very simple, with the only complexity being versioning.
Oracle specializes in keeping the "master" corporate data. It is robust and well-tested. MySql specializes in department-specific copies of subsets of the master data for internal or local usage. There may be a middle area where they fight for control, but in general it's a matter of the best tool for the job.
Table-ized A.I.
In our race to the bottom of the price bucket lots of things have to be cut and guess where they cut first, you guessed it, in support. With Oracle support you do not get script readers in India or the Philippines you get an Oracle engineer on the phone ready to tackle the problem with you until the problem is solved and they will bring in whatever other resources are required.
Well, I don't know if you'll be getting engineer or script readers but I did a little stats on their SUPPORT positions:
Chile: 78
US: 71:
India: 70
Romania: 28
Egypt: 16
China: 11
Rest of world: 47
Looks like Chile is the new India...
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
MySQL is a wonder database that does what it does very well, but would I put it up in a mission critical bit of infrastructure? Not on a bet. Those companies that have, eg: Sales Force and the like have had to hire LOTS of engineers/developers to handle MySQL in big installations and that costs even more.
Salesforce runs on Oracle....
I've had very good support from MySQL as well. This is experience from several years ago, before Sun or Oracle got involved. The nice thing is that you get to choose, if you don't want support then you pay very little - but ther enterprise level support is quite good.
I've got to add some embedded client components for syncing a MySQL DB data mart to a remote customer's web services XML interface to an existing app that runs in JBoss against MySQL, with a PHP interface (and a Flex/Flash client), code in an SVN repo.
Is there a good website telling me how to get started with Eclipse and the best plugins and configs, installed and configured on an Ubuntu server?
--
make install -not war
No, the database has never been supposed to be a black box. It is a abstraction that divides the data management problem into two parts: the logical and the physical. The logical side, very roughly, is schema definitions and queries. The physical side is physical data arrangement, indexing, data statistics, cost-based optimization, etc. To get good performance of the database, you must be ready to use the tools provided on the physical side.
Are you adequate?
The issue is .NET assemblies. The ones you create on the express versions will not work on the other ones. I do not think quake3 uses .NET assemblies so it should be portable. There are also no units and many debugging tools.
http://saveie6.com/
In a lot of organizations it is cheaper to pay for a 24/7/365 MySQL expert from the local community. I know a guy who does just that, signs up businesses, gives them the cell phone number, and is prepared at any time to help them.
He's cheaper than Oracle because he bills by the hour, not by the "support period." If your Oracle DB that you paid out the butt for a support contract on stays up for 3 years without issue, you are out a substantial amount of money, writing checks to Oracle for merely existing. Many small and medium businesses find it difficult to swallow the concept of paying big money for a program, and even bigger money for support, if they never use the dupport!
If you are a licensed Oracle site you have support 24/7/365...
Wrong. An Oracle license gets you squat. If you want support, you'll have to pay a yearly fee that's roughly one fourth of the astronomically high one time license fee.
http://www.oracle.com/corporate/pricing/pricelists.html
I will further that if you need support with PostgreSQL there is EnterpriseDB and a couple other companies who specialize in PostgreSQL. We've often used PostgreSQL for clients and it works extremely well. Then if they need more, we transition to DB2.
"The problem with socialism is eventually you run out of other people's money" - Thatcher.
Postgre has no such level of support either. So when you missions critical DB goes south either you better be able to fix it or you had better have a lot of friends you can wake up in the middle of the night.
There are companies out there doing 24x7 support for Postgres. Fujitsu Australia is one of them
You're serious?
I've had a production Oracle database go down due to a bug in Oracle and raised a support ticket. It took Oracle a week to produce a workaround - what kind of environment can afford to have the production database down for a week? I consider Oracle support okay if you're doing development and don't require quick turnaround but pretty much worthless for handling P1 incidents.
If your mission critical infrastructure suddenly stops working, are you seriously suggesting the best answer is to post a message to a mailing list and hope for a prompt response?
"If your mission critical infrastructure suddenly stops working, are you seriously suggesting the best answer is to post a message to a mailing list and hope for a prompt response?"
I do suggest it's usually no worse than take the phone and hope for a clued answer instead of one from a boiler-plated, menu-based monkey's one -but it's always awfully front-cost cheaper.
In a lot of organizations it is cheaper to pay for a 24/7/365 MySQL expert from the local community. I know a guy who does just that, signs up businesses, gives them the cell phone number, and is prepared at any time to help them.
What does he do if two of them call at the same time ?
If the easiest way of using the tool is not the correct way, then the design of the tool should be reevaluated. If you can't use a hammer, it might be your fault, but if the hammer has blades in the handle and can only be correctly used when wearing a certain kind of glove, it's probably the hammer's fault.
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
recommends someone more competent? how much do your db's go down?
You waste your money an overpriced corporate IT admin college grad and support contracts. Your admin had information thrust at him rapidfire in school so the school can claim an impressive curriculum, of which every class is worthless without several months of in the trenches experience BEFORE the next class. So he doesn't know a damn thing, except maybe some impressive sounding operational theory that might be useful to troubleshoot some fringe cases.
As a result, your admin makes you pay ridiculous prices so everything is quad redundant, the more visible to management and users a failure, the more redundant it must be. This way he has time to call support and get the answer.
Since you are paying so much for these support contracts and he is incompetent so he will call them about EVERYTHING. Demanding detailed explanations for minor and unimportant glitches with simple workarounds or that caused one device in a redundant pair to have to be rebooted once in two years.
The 'engineer' he calls is just a guy who doesn't have the option of calling anyone else but his co-workers and thus becomes knowledgable. He expends the time and effort to find the answer or wastes the time of real engineers/developers fixing your obscure and unimportant glitch.
And if you're not happy with them, they have several competitors hoping to take their business. If you're not happy with Oracle, how many other companies are willing to support your Oracle installation? How many of these have the source code access and expertise required to fix bugs that you encounter? Going with a single-vendor solution is a good way of announcing to the world that you don't really like money and you want someone else to relieve you of it.
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
That is my point, when you call Oracle support you do not get a "Menu based monkey reading from boiler plate", you get an oracle Engineer that knows your Oracle Software inside and out.
Hey KID! Yeah you, get the fuck off my lawn!
Nice try at a refute but that don't work. They are spread across the globe because as long as you will stay on the phone they will keep transferring you to the next support center as the world continues to turn. I know because I have done it, had an Oracle server down hard and started the conversation with a center in Denver and as the clock kept going I got transfered to the next engineer after they were briefed by my current engineer.
Hey KID! Yeah you, get the fuck off my lawn!
"That is my point, when you call Oracle support you do not get a "Menu based monkey reading from boiler plate", you get an oracle Engineer that knows your Oracle Software inside and out."
Maybe...
Once you pay for "premier support". I know that kind of support gives you a warm fuzzy feeling but did you ever considered ROI? I have to admit I never worked for a F-100 but it needs to be a *very* critical system the one that makes Oracle "premier support" a sounded technical decision instead of plain CYA.
For normal Oracle users or for those who pay for premier support?
;) ).
Many vendors hide their knowledgebase behind a paywall (e.g. CheckPoint Software, and Oracle it seems). That's not true for stuff like Postgresql.
I don't regard being able to pay to access a knowledgebase, as a positive feature. Or being able to pay to get support from people who have access to that paywalled knowledgebase. It really isn't better support to be able to talk to someone who is "more experienced" just because mountains of info has been locked up by the Vendor.
With Postgresql I wouldn't have to call support for many things in the first place - I would already know the answer, just from a few search queries!
The problems I'd need help for would be problems that aren't listed already. And often the Vendor is not able to provide an answer till the developers figure it out. And I doubt most developers do 24/7 support - whether they are Oracle, Postgresql or Microsoft developers. It's just bad for the developer's productivity .
FWIW, I'm the sort of guy who has hexedited 3rd party products to provide features that the 3rd party says are only available in a different product, or to fix bugs that the 3rd party is "going to fix soon" (which is often different from soon enough
I'm sure many of us on Slashdot have done stuff like this.
So there's no _technical_ reason (but CYA is useful) for us paying to get a "menu based monkey" or even someone who knows how to use Google. I'm sure we know how to use Google, Bing etc.
With the postgresql mailing list support, I can get real "down to the bits and bytes" sort of answers from the developers. And they actually know a lot more about the DB (and often other stuff) than I do.
except that with .NET 4.0, it uses a different CLR version (the first since .NET became popular), so a lot of apps that were built using .NET 1.1, 2.0 or 3.5 will not work with your app.
This isn't quite correct.
I'm not sure what exactly you mean by "since .NET became popular", but there have been 3 major CLR versions so far - v1, v2 and v4. So this kind of thing isn't new.
Furthermore, the differences between v1 and v2 were much bigger than between v2 and v4. In fact, so far as I know, the assembly file format didn't change at all between v2 and v4, so any v4 assembly is also a valid v2 assembly (correct me if I'm wrong here). Most certainly, the format is backwards compatible, so a v1 assembly will load and run on v2 or v4, and a v2 assembly will load and run on v4.
What did change in .NET 4 release is the libraries. It doesn't do you much good if bytecode and metadata format is backwards compatible, if said bytecode calls methods which had their semantics changed. For example, a bunch of string methods were changed from locale-sensitive to ordinal comparison by default.
The point, however, is that you're not supposed to be trying to run a binary compiled for, say, v2 on v4. Several .NET versions can be installed side-by-side precisely so that applications can use whatever major version they're been written against. Migration is supposed to be source-level, not binary-level.
There has been an issue there in that only one CLR runtime could be loaded in any given process - so if an application allows plugins written in managed code (and if it loads plugins via COM, then it implicitly does that), whichever version of CLR is loaded first will be used to run all managed code that is later loaded in the same process. This was a major source of bugs for e.g. managed Windows Shell extensions, though not limited to that alone. With .NET 4, this is fixed, though the fix is not retroactive - so you can load v4 alongside v2, or v4 alongside v1, but not v2 alongside v1. Future versions will retain in-process side-by-side, obviously, so when v5 (or whatever it'll be) comes out, you should be able to have v5, v4 and v2 loaded side-by-side.
Why they couldn't just use "current directory, GAC, path" for searching, for example, is crazy.
That's pretty much what it boils down to by default for a plain application and unsigned assemblies, unless you're using a manifest or code to override it, or run on top of a framework which does that for you (such as ASP.NET).
The reason why signed assemblies aren't loaded from current path is security - a current directory may be world-writable, the GAC is not. It's not a particularly strong mechanism, but it serves its role. If you don't care about it, then just don't use signing or GAC (unless you run into another piece of software that requires GAC'd assemblies - such as SharePoint - which I personally hate due to all the hassle of developing that way).
Document this with the case number and the support notes or it didn't happen.
Hey KID! Yeah you, get the fuck off my lawn!
A bit hard now as I'm no longer working at that company.
In case it is relevant, I live in New Zealand where Oracle have no 'on the ground' technical staff.