|
Blog: Pete LoshinApril 18, 2008Clarifying the MySQL "Closed-Sourcing" brouhahaRemember yesterday? Well, I was reading that post again and realized that it's not entirely clear what Sun is actually doing with MySQL. Here's another article about the whole thing, MySQL Not Going Closed Source? that you can check out, but the gist of it is this: MySQL Server is still (and always was) open source. The difference is not (as I might have implied yesterday) that the Enterprise product was going to be different. What's actually happening is that if you are an Enterprise customer (meaning, you're paying the big bucks for the Enterprise license), you get some extra "add-ons". Somehow, calling them "add-ons" made a big difference (for me, anyway) in understanding what's going on: Sun is giving their customers another reason to pay extra for Enterprise MySQL. The add-on in question, this time, is online backup. If you want to do online backup with MySQL at this point, you have two options:
Sun Senior VP and former MySQL CEO Marten Mickos spelled it out, pretty much in those words. I believe in free and open software as much as the next person. I also think that companies "selling" open source software have not just the right but the obligation (to their shareholders) to find a business model that allows them to continue to publish open source software. Enterprise customers have special needs--needs that generally don't intersect with the needs of most individuals or small groups who are using the software--and that as a result, it makes sense to have enterprise customers get the extra add-ons as part of their licensing fees. Am I wrong? April 17, 2008Is Sun/MySQL selling out, or just selling?Here's some news: MySQL, Sun's still-shiny new open source database acquisition, will be adding new features to its Enterprise (that is, paid) version that won't be added to the Community (free and open) version. Here's the story at ComputerWorld: MySQL reserves features for paying customers; open-source community up in arms. Oddly enough, though, the story seems to have originated on Jeremy Cole’s blog: That tells me one of two things is happening: either Sun/MySQL is trying to pull a fast one and sneak this new development under everyone's radar, or else this is just business as usual and not anything to get upset about--or at least, not be surprised about. You can read about "user outrage" in the ComputerWorld article, as well as on Slashdot (Sun to Begin Close Sourcing MySQL). But Sun has to find a way to make that MySQL acquisition pay off, somehow. On the other hand, as Dana Blankenhorn points out here (Did Sun just make mySQL closed source?), MySQL started limited source code access to its Enterprise version last year--if you want to see the code, you've got to be a paying customer. That's fine: if you've paid for an Enterprise license, you get to see the source code (and do what you want with it). It shouldn't surprise anyone when a company that runs an open source project tries to make it pay off. The good news is that there is a huge--and strong--open source MySQL community, and that (as Mickos pointed out) anyone who likes could develop their own, free and open, version of the features that aren't going to make it into the community version. I'm sure we'll be hearing more interested news from the open source database players in days and weeks to come (including from me!). One of the exciting aspects of this development is that it illustrates and illuminates some of the most critical issues facing paying and non-paying users of open source software, as well as the vendors who are trying to build their businesses on free software. January 22, 2008Sun to buy MySQL, Part OneUnless you've been under a rock, you know Sun is buying MySQL AB. That was news, last week. But it was also rather puzzling news, in many ways, and worth taking some time out to consider the implications. So, for Part One of my coverage of the Sun/MySQL deal, I'm mostly going to offer a bunch of links. For example, the Yahoo! News breaking news story: Sun to buy MySQL for $1 billion. You get the basics of the deal here, but you also get some of the issues spelled out for you: Sun is a "server maker"; meaning, they're a hardware company. Other key points to consider:
The Yahoo! article gives a pretty good precis of the situation, but you need to dig a little deeper to figure out what exactly is going on. For example, they don't say much about the extent to which Sun controls some very important pieces of software already, including Java, OpenSolaris, StarOffice, NetBeans, and more. Nor do they mention Sun's existing relationship with the other star open source DBMS project, PostgreSQL. For more about Sun, MySQL and PostgreSQL, check out Sun buys MySQL - what about PostgreSQL?, and Sun Purchasing MySQL and PostgreSQL advances from PostgreSQL. Check back next week for my take on the implications and impact this deal with ultimately have, but in the meantime, here are some of the more interesting articles/blog entries I've found in the past few days about it:
For the record, the official press releases here:
January 9, 2008YouTube and MySQLYouTube, it turns out, uses MySQL as its backend. Paul Tuckfield, the YouTube DBA, speaks about using MySQL at YouTube. Before I even finished listening to the whole presentation, I got several key points:
The talk, recorded last year at the 2007 MySQL Conference, is only about 40 minutes long, so it's the perfect length for listening during your commute--and Paul is an engaging and funny speaker!
November 13, 2007Installing MySQL: A Tale of Two PlatformsBefore I begin here, be warned: one of the links I'm pointing to here is NSFW. That means "NOT SAFE FOR WORK", and in this case it means that the page contains vulgar language and profantiy. If you're easily offended or are at work, you may want to go do something else now. Here's the story: On November 10, this article was posted: Installing MySQL on Mac OS X. A well-written, comprehensive, detailed and in-depth how-to article that anyone who wants to get MySQL going on OS X would be happy to stumble over. The guy who wrote it, Dan Benjamin, seems a talented and very nice fellow, and he went to a great deal of trouble to put the article together. I'm guessing that sometime shortly after that article got posted, Mark Pilgrim read it and decided that running MySQL on a Mac seemed like a lot work--much more than using it on Linux. Then, Mark wrote his own "answer", contrasting, how-to Installing MySQL on Ubuntu (the NSFW way). This article is NSFW. But it's also hilarious as H-E-double-hockey-sticks, and it looks to be just as useful as the first article. If you're worried about the foul language in the second article, I'll summarize: installing MySQL on OS X sounds like an incredibly complicated and scary adventure; installing it on an Ubuntu Linux box sounds like a walk in the park. The funny thing is, we just got an iMac. And I just installed MySQL on an Ubuntu Linux system. I don't anticipate installing it on the iMac, so I'm enjoying this on multiple levels. August 3, 2007Quick MySQL PointersLooking for help with MySQL? Check out 20 Indispensible MySQL Resources for some helpful and interesting pointers. June 25, 2007MoSQL: It burns and is less crowded!I saw a link to something called "MoSQL", and could tell it had something to do with MySQL. I had to check it out. The linked page is in Japanese--which I don't speak. But Google does, sort of. The translate function returned some amusing translation text, which I think says that MoSQL is a version of MySQL that runs with the character code defaulting to UTF-8 for high-speed full-text retrievals on Japanese text. And MoSQL error messages are mostly in Japanese. Reading between the lines and tilting my head a bit, I interpret the Google translation to tell me that MySQL doesn't do as good a job as might be preferred at handling Japanese text. For example, the implication is that some data can be lost when using plain MySQL, and Japanese text retrieval may be slower than it should be. Which shows that open source is a force for good in a lot of ways: it provides a way for IT people around the world who don't speak English to get their jobs done without having to learn English, for one thing. And it shows that if a software provider doesn't respond to user needs, someone else can take up the challenge. It wouldn't surprise me if the MoSQL news (whatever it actually is) prompted MySQL AB to make some moves to provide better support for its international customers. April 26, 2007MySQL to Go PublicC|net is reporting MySQL hits $50 million revenue, plans IPO. I'm tempted to include a big ho-hum here, because of course they do. Not in a bad way, mind you--it's just that they've been getting injections of venture capital since 2001, and those VCs do like their liquidity events. January 31, 2007MySQL AB to Go PublicComputer Business Review Online is reporting that open source vendor MySQL is getting ready to go public in MySQL prepares for IPO and reveals Oracle endorsement. According to the article, MySQL CEO Marten Mickos told CBR Online that although MySQL still hasn't spent more than half of the VC money it's already raised, they may be ready to roll out an IPO by the end of this year. Read the article, and, discuss. January 22, 2007MySQL Windows Binary Release Shenanigans?Everyone just chill out. It's easy to see conspiracies and plots and all that if you look hard enough, but there's nothing to see here. Really. More inside, if you can't resist... Continue reading "MySQL Windows Binary Release Shenanigans?" » December 13, 2006Open Source BenchmarkingJonathan Ellis ran an interesting note about MySQL and PostgreSQL database benchmarking (Benchmark: PostgreSQL beats the stuffing out of MySQL), with pointers to some work done at the Netherlands tech website, Tweakers.net. Jonathan points out that while MySQL's own benchmarks tend to favor MySQL (just like any vendor and their own internal benchmarks), he points out that when the benchmarking is being done by independent third-party, PostgreSQL seems to do significantly better. Benchmarking is an interesting field, producing interesting results, but performance on standardized tests must be balanced against the performance on the actual task in question as well as the suitability of the product to meet that particular challenge. The original content (in English, thankfully), is here and here. February 16, 2006What Open Source Company is Next for Oracle? Not MySQL.C|Net is reporting that Oracle tried, unsuccessfully, to buy leading open source database company MySQL AB (see Oracle tried to buy open-source MySQL, but according to Marten Mickos, MySQL head honcho, they were turned down. Could be that this is peak season for liquidity moments for a whole lot of open source business intelligence companies; see my previous comment, Oracle Open Source Buying Spree Reported. Who's next? January 4, 2006A MySQL Win, Or Is It?Software companies may (or may not) spend lots of money on advertising in the trade press, but they live or die but what the editorial content says about their products. So this review, Road Test: Four Databases Tested, published in the Australian website Builder AU must have been very good news for MySQL AB. Because they were awarded an "Editor's Choice" on the strength of its list of advanced features along with strong performance in ease of use and GUI administration. "Testing" is a rather strong word for the kind of comparo review presented here: there was no benchmarking or other more formalized activities typically associated with software testing. What the editors did, as I have done more than once for publications as august as BYTE Magazine, PC World and PC Magazine, was to select the leading products in a category, choose criteria other than mere performance, usually focusing on things like feature checklists, user interface, support and ease of use, and then rate them. This gives some basis for comparison among the products, but without forcing the editors to shell out what would be serious money to pay for highly-skilled testers to do more rigorous testing. The products chosen in this case included MySQL, Microsoft's SQL Server Express Edition (Beta2), Oracle's 10g Standard Edition, and IBM's DB2 Express; does it mean that MySQL is the best product for every database application? Of course not. But it's an interesting read and certainly a valuable resource if you need to compare features. November 9, 2005What's up with MySQL AB?It may be the "M" in the "LAMP" (Linux/Apache/MySQL/Perl-PHP-Python) open source web publishing platform, but MySQL is also the basis of MySQL AB's business. And MySQL AB has been popping up on a lot of radar screens this autumn. |
Comprehensive resources for business intelligence and data warehousing professionals.
NETWORK WEBSITES:
BeyeSEARCH | BeyeBLOGS | BeyeRESEARCH | TDAN.com | BeyeNETWORK
Press Releases | About Us | Contact Us | Site Map | Privacy Policy | Media Kit
Copyright 2004 — 2008. Powell Media LLC. All rights reserved.
Business Intelligence Network™ is a trademark of Powell Media, LLC