...PC's are quite fragmented yet which has a larger hold after all these years, Apple or PC?
Er yes, Windows PCs also have viruses and a bunch of bloatware as well. Do you want to spend a bunch of time managing your devices or actually using them?
The other issue is that SQLite uses a single lock on the database, so if you have more than a small number of concurrent updates, it won't be pretty. Still, if there's interest in replicating to/from we would be up for it or would hope that somebody might see their way to add a plug-in for it. In the meantime, it looks like a really handy embedded database.
The license for our current software is GPL v2. This covers replicating MySQL to MySQL as well as from MySQL into Oracle and other databases. Oracle redo log support will be commercial, but there will be a free version for up to 2 hosts. I will get source builds posted today . Finally, if you can tell me what the problem was with SVN I'll try to fix that as well. (SVN is making us a little crazy at the moment--sorry if you are infected by it. The MySQL guys recently switched to Bazaar, which is starting to look kind of attractive.)
One of the first comments I got on the original blog posting for MySQL replication was whether we could replicate in and out of SQLite. We are still thinking about that-if there's demand we'll do it. Plus there are guys within our team that think we should be using it to store replication events.
Hi, on the contrary, this is not just another layer of software. First, our software is alternative replication that fixes a number of problems with existing mechanisms like MySQL replication . Second, it provides replication (or will when we release) where it is sorely needed, namely low-end Oracle implementations. Whoever put this on Slashdot got the title right. Third, cross-database replication is a big problem for a lot of people and there's nothing in open source right now that addresses it effectively. Taken together this sounds pretty innovative to me. But then I wrote the original post, so these arguments are perhaps not unexpected.:)
Hi! Speaking as the author of the aforesaid blog, MySQL clearly got some things very right--mostly around about basic usability. It's nice to have replication baked in, for example. That's a fundamental reason why so many people use it.
The synchronization and failure issues are pretty serious. As another poster pointed out we are equally serious about fixing them. If you read my blog we are pretty clear about what they are. One issue we can't solve completely involves problems with consistency between the binlog and the database itself because there are some two-phase commit issues that require storage engine if not architecture changes. However, we will fix everything we can without going into the database.
It's hands-down easier to use, especially for people who are not database experts. There's not even an installation in the Oracle sense of the word--you just 'yum install' and it's there or maybe it came straight off the distribution you installed. That was part of my point what MySQL really got right.
Keep watching. It won't be alpha for long. On the plus side we are being completely open about the development and will not deceive you about the true state of the software. Robert (the guy that wrote the original blog entry)
Slashdot Mirror
...PC's are quite fragmented yet which has a larger hold after all these years, Apple or PC?
Er yes, Windows PCs also have viruses and a bunch of bloatware as well. Do you want to spend a bunch of time managing your devices or actually using them?
The other issue is that SQLite uses a single lock on the database, so if you have more than a small number of concurrent updates, it won't be pretty. Still, if there's interest in replicating to/from we would be up for it or would hope that somebody might see their way to add a plug-in for it. In the meantime, it looks like a really handy embedded database.
The license for our current software is GPL v2. This covers replicating MySQL to MySQL as well as from MySQL into Oracle and other databases. Oracle redo log support will be commercial, but there will be a free version for up to 2 hosts. I will get source builds posted today . Finally, if you can tell me what the problem was with SVN I'll try to fix that as well. (SVN is making us a little crazy at the moment--sorry if you are infected by it. The MySQL guys recently switched to Bazaar, which is starting to look kind of attractive.)
One of the first comments I got on the original blog posting for MySQL replication was whether we could replicate in and out of SQLite. We are still thinking about that-if there's demand we'll do it. Plus there are guys within our team that think we should be using it to store replication events.
Hey, come on. We paid good money for somebody to think up that name for us. Besides I like Ents. ;)
Hi, on the contrary, this is not just another layer of software. First, our software is alternative replication that fixes a number of problems with existing mechanisms like MySQL replication . Second, it provides replication (or will when we release) where it is sorely needed, namely low-end Oracle implementations. Whoever put this on Slashdot got the title right. Third, cross-database replication is a big problem for a lot of people and there's nothing in open source right now that addresses it effectively. Taken together this sounds pretty innovative to me. But then I wrote the original post, so these arguments are perhaps not unexpected. :)
Hi! Speaking as the author of the aforesaid blog, MySQL clearly got some things very right--mostly around about basic usability. It's nice to have replication baked in, for example. That's a fundamental reason why so many people use it.
The synchronization and failure issues are pretty serious. As another poster pointed out we are equally serious about fixing them. If you read my blog we are pretty clear about what they are. One issue we can't solve completely involves problems with consistency between the binlog and the database itself because there are some two-phase commit issues that require storage engine if not architecture changes. However, we will fix everything we can without going into the database.
It's hands-down easier to use, especially for people who are not database experts. There's not even an installation in the Oracle sense of the word--you just 'yum install' and it's there or maybe it came straight off the distribution you installed. That was part of my point what MySQL really got right.
Keep watching. It won't be alpha for long. On the plus side we are being completely open about the development and will not deceive you about the true state of the software. Robert (the guy that wrote the original blog entry)