>They already have at least two others:
I guess I should say a transactional storange engine that is competitive with InnoDB (or Oracle). BDB isn't there and isn't well supported by MySQL. Also NDB is definitely no replacement for InnoDB.
>How are they going to patent stuff that's been available under GPL for 10+ years?
That's whay no one seems to understand InnoBase is just like mysql in this regard. They actually own the code. They just choose to release a version under GPL. The only reason they couldn't do this is if this code was created by the open source community. This isn't the case as both InnoDB and MySQL code is under tight control. If someone does wish to submit a patch that mysql or Innobase doesn't wish to re-write they will ask you to sign over ownership of that code.
The majority of MySQL AB's revenue comes from commercial licensing. Companies can only use the GPL licensed MySQL if their code is also using the GPL. Most commercial companies can't use the GPL version of MySQL for this reason. Currently MySQL will sell you a commercial license allowing you to use InnoDB without the GPL but that is only because they have a contract with Innobase until next year for the commercial rights to redistribute Innodb. Now that Oracle owns Innobase this puts mysql in a really tough position. The only way they can continue to sell commercial licenses of mysql (with InnoDB) is to negotiate a contract with Oracle. It seems to me that Oracle really holds all the cards in this deal. They could ask MySQL to pay huge sums of money for redistribution rights. If they can't come to an agreement Oracle won't really care. They just made mysql no longer commercially viable for most companies. MySQL made the comment that since the code is GPL that they can just go forward using the existing InnoDB code. Sure that's true but the only customers who can use this code are those willing to abide by he GPL and most large companies currently invested in supporting MySQL with their applications aren't able to do this.
Time will tell what Oracle intends to do with this new acquisition but It puts them in a perfect strategic position. They can re-negotiate a contract with MySQL where they stand to make a lot of money. This might also push up the cost of commercial licenses of mysql so they are no longer as competitive. They can refuse to give mysql commercial redistribution rights thereby dealing mysql a huge blow to their business. At this point who knows what they really intend to do, Oracle probably doesn't even know yet but they also realize this palces them into a great strategic position for the future.
MySQL also has a large number of talented employees so it's possible they could develop their own transactional storage engine but the difficulty of doing this can't be underestimated. If they decided to go that route it could be years before they had a viable alternative to InnoDB. Even if they did this it wouldn't surprise me to see Oracle sue them for patent infringement, as Oracle's next task is probably to patent as many parts of the InnoDB code as possible.
Slashdot Mirror
>They already have at least two others: I guess I should say a transactional storange engine that is competitive with InnoDB (or Oracle). BDB isn't there and isn't well supported by MySQL. Also NDB is definitely no replacement for InnoDB. >How are they going to patent stuff that's been available under GPL for 10+ years? That's whay no one seems to understand InnoBase is just like mysql in this regard. They actually own the code. They just choose to release a version under GPL. The only reason they couldn't do this is if this code was created by the open source community. This isn't the case as both InnoDB and MySQL code is under tight control. If someone does wish to submit a patch that mysql or Innobase doesn't wish to re-write they will ask you to sign over ownership of that code.
The majority of MySQL AB's revenue comes from commercial licensing. Companies can only use the GPL licensed MySQL if their code is also using the GPL. Most commercial companies can't use the GPL version of MySQL for this reason. Currently MySQL will sell you a commercial license allowing you to use InnoDB without the GPL but that is only because they have a contract with Innobase until next year for the commercial rights to redistribute Innodb. Now that Oracle owns Innobase this puts mysql in a really tough position. The only way they can continue to sell commercial licenses of mysql (with InnoDB) is to negotiate a contract with Oracle. It seems to me that Oracle really holds all the cards in this deal. They could ask MySQL to pay huge sums of money for redistribution rights. If they can't come to an agreement Oracle won't really care. They just made mysql no longer commercially viable for most companies. MySQL made the comment that since the code is GPL that they can just go forward using the existing InnoDB code. Sure that's true but the only customers who can use this code are those willing to abide by he GPL and most large companies currently invested in supporting MySQL with their applications aren't able to do this.
Time will tell what Oracle intends to do with this new acquisition but It puts them in a perfect strategic position. They can re-negotiate a contract with MySQL where they stand to make a lot of money. This might also push up the cost of commercial licenses of mysql so they are no longer as competitive. They can refuse to give mysql commercial redistribution rights thereby dealing mysql a huge blow to their business. At this point who knows what they really intend to do, Oracle probably doesn't even know yet but they also realize this palces them into a great strategic position for the future.
MySQL also has a large number of talented employees so it's possible they could develop their own transactional storage engine but the difficulty of doing this can't be underestimated. If they decided to go that route it could be years before they had a viable alternative to InnoDB. Even if they did this it wouldn't surprise me to see Oracle sue them for patent infringement, as Oracle's next task is probably to patent as many parts of the InnoDB code as possible.