Slashdot Mirror
There Is No Reason At All To Use MySQL: MariaDB, MySQL Founder Michael Widenius
sfcrazy writes "In this exclusive interview MySQL founder Michael Widenius talks about the reasons of decline of MySQL, what Oracle is doing wrong and how MariaDB is fast replacing it. There are quite some interesting information in this interview. The take out of this interview is '...there is no reason at all to use MySQL 5.5 instead of MariaDB 5.5. The same will be true for the next generation.'"
Of course, he has an economic interest in getting people to use MariaDB. Hard to argue that Oracle isn't evil though.
...there is no reason at all to use MySQL 5.5 instead of MariaDB 5.5
Or Postgres, which is better than MySQL in numerous objective/technical ways and has been for years.
If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
The Maria builds have not been particularly special, and its hard to take anything he says about MySQL seriously. So much doublespeak. Stop posting his rants as relevant or news. This is little more than an ad for his support/consulting org.
It's also what Postres fans have been saying for years. Maybe they're right about other things?
As a general rule of thumb, if you need something lightweight, SQLite is the way to go. If you need something more powerful or sophisticated than that, PostgreSQL.
MySQL and spinoffs all occupy an uncomfortable middle ground. 99% of the small web sites which are built around MySQL don't need it.
Most MySQL/MariaDB users wont care at all about this, because there are millions of them who are not Slashdot or Amazon or Facebook - this DB silently powers millions of Internet connected things, and it's just a given that it works, performs, has fit-for-purpose stability. It's a sign of how far OSS has come when people have the luxury of quibbling over WHICH free, capable DB they want to base their business model on.
I want to delete my account but Slashdot doesn't allow it.
What the heck? That's EXACTLY what OP said. Re-read the sentence you quoted.
If you want the "free" version, there isn't a significant difference for 95% of users, agreed. However, MariaDB support is miles better and cheaper than Oracle's "Enterprise MySQL" support is. Also, calling Monty names is cheap and rather unfounded.
I was promised a flying car. Where is my flying car?
Maybe Postgres is a better DB in a theoretical way. It could be that in a brand new design for an application, it will be better in practice as well. However, if you run existing code or use an "off the shelf" open source application, chances are, it will be tested and developed on MySQL/MariaDB and not on Postgres. Until the choice is just as easy to make as the choice for either MySQL or MariaDB, I doubt it's "better" for 90+% of all MariaDB/MySQL users. Those users have a choice for either something that works, or something that will need a lot of porting and testing done. It may seem small and insignificant to Postgres experts to do that, but to those 90+%, it ishttp://developers.slashdot.org/story/13/05/05/2050220/there-is-no-reason-at-all-to-use-mysql-mariadb-mysql-founder-michael-widenius?utm_source=rss1.0mainlinkanon&utm_medium=feed# most likely far beyond their capabilities, probably cost prohibitive and in a lot of cases just not an option at all.
I was promised a flying car. Where is my flying car?
I've found JudasDB to be very reliable so far.
My reason is because there is no compelling reason right now for me to switch. Once it is in my next Ubuntu upgrade or my ISP switches to it then I'll do so as well.
"Enjoy what you're doing! If it becomes drudgery, you're doing it wrong!" - Jim Butterfield
Michael Widenius has benefited from gathering millions of developers around his product and letting them down.
He cannot sell source code of MariaDB this time, but he still can sell the brand name and the community which has trusted him again to earn another fortune. Fool me once, full me twice...
Especially since sqlite came about. For no-setup, small-size databases, you use that. For more features, if you need em, there's Postgress.
The main reason to stay away from PostgreSQL is its toolset. Specifically, it's almost impossible to find a tool that allows you to analyze and tune it's performance. I say 'almost' because there may be one out there that I haven't found...but I've looked on and off for years, with no results.
For mysql there's lots of tools, like jetprofiler. For oracle you can pay. For SQLite, well, who cares. For psql, it's (as one website put it) a black art. Do you really want that as your back end?
and being purely selfish with ZFS is just nauseating anymore.
Uhm, your saying that its Oracles fault Sun and many other people dont' like the viral nature of GPL and intentionally licensed the software in such a way that prevents your silly fanboy license from being able to leech it? You're saying that its okay for you to have software your way ... but not for anyone else to be free to have it their own way.
You're just another one of the freeloaders. Any talk about liberty is just bullshit your spewing to hide the truth.
My OS has been using ZFS for years without any problems, stop your whining, you got what you intended out of your license. GPL is incompatible with ZFS, not the other way around. Get a clue
Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
98% of "web Programmers" wouldn't know a good database if it dragged them out of the parents basement and gave them a blow job.
I would not recommend using Oracle to run a simple web site. It is complete over kill. I would not recommend using MySQL / Maria to run the VISA processing center either.
99.9% of application builders do not even know the value of a good, much less great, DB engine and that is proven out time and time again when you look at their DB schema and all you see are tables. They all insist on doing EVERYTHING on the front end and never get , even when advised about, the amount of power that DB's like Oracle, PostGres, MS-SQL, DB2 and even MySQL have these days. One well written Stored Procedure ( Oracle Speak ). Package ( Oracle Speak ), function ( PostGres Speak ) or Procedure ( MySQL/ MS-SQL Speak ) can eliminate 1000's of lines of java, python, ruby, php ( pick your language ) front end code, and perform the function 1000x faster and more reliably.
Every tool has its use. When you need massive scaleibility, up time in the 5 9's category and support RIGHT FUCKING NOW WITH AN ACTUAL ENGINEER when you dial the toll free number 24/7/365 you get the big dogs like Oracle,MS-SQL or DB2. If those factors are less important then you have other choices like Postgres ( they REALLY need to fix the TXID issue ) which is very powerful but lacks the kind of SLA's that you can get with Oracle / Microsoft. If just getting feedback from the support community is fine the MySQL / Maria are fine choices.
I design VERY large databases that push DB's to their limits. Google had to design their own because nothing off the shelf or even from the FOOS community could handle their requirements but it takes a small army to deal with it and most companies don't have the resources or don't want to have that many people on their payroll.
The bottom line is use the DB that fits your requirements, fits your budget and has the support organization around it so when you have a problem your requirements are met, and it really does not matter who you get it from. Don't be religious about it. ALL of these companies are trying to build the best product to serve their market and that is the bottom line.
Michael Widenius is nothing but a little bitch. He sold his DB to sun for how much again? 1 BILLION dollars I think it was. Now shut the fuck up, go sit on your riches and do MariaDB if you want but stop bitching about what happened to MySQL because he YOU are the idiot who cashed in and sold out.
Hey KID! Yeah you, get the fuck off my lawn!
Postgresql is more feature complete, just as fast, and properly free software.
I run: Windows, OS X, Linux, FreeBSD. Just because you have a hammer, doesn't mean everything is a nail.
Oracle has a HUGE economic interest in making sure MySQL sucks bad enough that customers buy Oracle databases instead.
I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
OK, that's a fair point, though I'm not sure hosting providers are falling over themselves to offer MariaDB either if my own experience is at all representative. In that market, it's more about popularity and the established brand than anything else, and if you want anything other than a canned MySQL/WP/etc. set-up then you basically need to move up a tier and get yourself a shell account on a VPS or something.
If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
Big advice to anyone who ever gets the "bright" idea of trying to port a substantial application from MySQL to Oracle: don't. And if your boss tells you that you have to, start looking for a new job, because it's a fool's errand almost guaranteed to fail. Not even *Oracle* would ever recommend porting an app from MySQL to Oracle. The problem is that MySQL does well in many scenarios as long as you humor its quirks, but those quirks you've humored will come back and destroy your performance, or make it outright impossible to port the application to a database like Oracle at some later point in time. The problem is that MySQL has certain rules and constraints that you CAN work around to get acceptable performance, but those work-arounds are either frowned upon, or point-blank prohibited, by databases like Oracle. Rewriting your query to get good performance out of MySQL will almost certainly result in the same query causing Oracle to either reject it, fall flat on its face, ditch its indices, and/or do full table scans to satisfy you.
Fool me once, full me twice...
...empty me the third time?
You meant to say:
fool me once, shame on
shame on you.
Fool me
you can't get fooled again
Not that you shouldn't use stored procs, etc but you shouldn't become obsessed over it either.
It's not revelent until the AMAZON RDS adopts MariaDB over MySQL 5.5!
Isn't most of the point of RDS that you don't really have to care what's under the hood?
They don't grade fathers, but if your daughter's a stripper, you fucked up. --Chris Rock
Here, these fell out of your post: ' e ' ' ' e. My pleasure.
Not that you shouldn't use stored procs, etc but you shouldn't become obsessed over it either.
THIS.
I'd go a step further and say simply never use stored procs. They really cement you into exactly one platform. If you write your code to be DB-agnostic then you're going to have a LOT more flexibility down the road. Oh, and that isn't just flexibility to change DB Vendors - even Oracle has been known to deprecate some of their stuff and if you relied on them that means a lot of rework. If you rely on ANSI SQL you can pretty-much guarantee that it will still work (if you use it right - like not assuming that an unordered query returns results in some particular order).
Some programmers just don't grok SQL either. I can't tell you how many queries I've seen that are implemented with either a wall of SQL, or even a stored procedure, that could be expressed as maybe 10 lines of well-indented SQL written properly. I've seen subqueries nested 10 levels deep that implement simple inner joins - they're worse than trying to read compiler output (especially when nobody bothers to format them). Hint, if your query contains the expression "WHERE 1" a dozen times you're probably doing something wrong.
I think a great advantage of SQLite is no stored procedures.
I've seen stored procedures munge backup/restore operations and have all kinds of unintended consequences when a developer is over-aggressive with them.
Then they're difficult to scale versus up-scaling front-ends that run the logic.
As an ex-DB-Admin for ~100 developers, my rule was: no stored procedures.
Science & open-source build trust from peer review. Learn systems you can trust.