MySQL
Analysis of open source DBMS vendor MySQL (recently acquired by Sun Microsystems), its products, and other products in the MySQL ecosystem. Related subjects include:
What hard-core transactional applications have actually been built in MySQL, PostgreSQL, EnterpriseDB, or FileMaker?
And here’s the biggie.
Question of the day #3
What complex, high-volume transactional applications have actually been built in mid-range DBMS such as MySQL, PostgreSQL, FileMaker, or EnterpriseDB?
I’ve been flamed for suggesting that MySQL or FileMaker aren’t fully equal to Oracle and DB2 in supporting hard-core transactional applications. (Which is ironic, because I’ve also been flamed for suggesting hard-core transactional support isn’t as big a deal for DBMS selection as some relational purists insist. But I digress …) So I’m putting the question out there — what impressive transactional applications do the stand-alone mid-range DBMS actually support? Read more
| Categories: EnterpriseDB and Postgres Plus, FileMaker, Mid-range, MySQL, OLTP, Open source, PostgreSQL | 20 Comments |
A high write-volume MySQL user
Spinn3r crawls and indexes blogs. It says it covers 1 million blogs and 25K posts/hour, doing thousands of write transactions per second. And it does this into federated MySQL — but with a lot of software built on top. To wit: Read more
| Categories: MySQL, Specific users | 1 Comment |
14 reasons not to use MySQL or other mid-range database management systems
I may argue for the use of open source and other mid-range database management systems, but a lot of industry sentiment remains on the other side. Vendors of high-end RDBMS naturally advocate enterprise-wide single-vendor adoption. Many CIOs and industry analysts, overwhelmed by product proliferation, think that’s a neat idea as well.
And in fairness, they’re not entirely wrong. Here are 14 reasons for using high-end relational database management systems, even on applications for which mid-range DBMS would suffice. Read more
| Categories: Microsoft and SQL*Server, Mid-range, MySQL, OLTP, Open source, Oracle, PostgreSQL | 25 Comments |
What leading DBMS vendors don’t want you to realize
For very high-end applications, the list of viable database management systems is short. Scalability can be a problem. (The rankings of most scalable alternatives differ in the OLTP and data warehouse realms.) Extreme levels of security can be had from only a few DBMS. (Oracle would have you believe there’s only one choice.) And if you truly need 99.99% uptime, there only are a few DBMS you even should consider.
But for most applications at any enterprise – and for all applications at most enterprises – super high-end DBMS aren’t required. There are relatively few applications that wouldn’t run perfectly well on PostgreSQL or EnterpriseDB today. Ingres and Progress OpenEdge aren’t far behind (they’re a little lacking in datatype support). Ditto Intersystems Cache’, although the nonrelational architecture will be off-putting to many. And to varying degrees, you can also do fine with MySQL, Pervasive PSQL, MaxDB, or a variety of other products – or for that matter with the cheap or free crippled versions of Oracle, SQL Server, DB2, and Informix.
What’s more, these mid-range database management systems can have significant advantages over their high-end brethren. Read more
Will Brighthouse become the MySQL data warehouse of choice?
As I’ve previously noted:
- Infobright is about to make more noise about its MySQL-based data warehouse software, Brighthouse.
- Brighthouse has some very interesting technical features.
- A Sun/Infobright partnership would make a lot of sense.
Talking with Infobright today, I was again struck by how close their relationship with MySQL (the company is). Stay tuned.
| Categories: Analytic technologies, Data warehousing, Infobright, MySQL | Leave a Comment |
Open source DBMS as a business model
Sun’s planned acquisition of MySQL is inspiring a lot of discussion about open source business models. Typical is Michael Arrington’s cheerleading for the idea that you can make a lot of money with open source. More interesting is Gordon Haff’s suggestion that it’s a lot easier to make money with open source when you have other things to actually sell to the same customers (e.g., the rest of Sun’s product line). (A similar view can be found here.)
To analyze this more carefully, it helps to distinguish among three different aspects of open source models:
- Open source product packaging
- Open source product development
- Open source pricing
Here’s what I think about each in the case of database management systems. Read more
| Categories: MySQL, Open source | 5 Comments |
The blogosphere writes about Sun buying MySQL
More from me soon, but first here is a survey of what other people are saying about Sun’s billion-dollar deal to acquire MySQL:
- Jeremy Cole, evidently a very experienced high-end MySQL user, itemizes some serious problems with MySQL — optimizer, memory management, replication, and so on. (Uh, Jeremy — what part of the product do you like?) He also echoes a theme I’ve seen elsewhere, and to some extent noticed myself; MySQL has had a lot of management issues as a company.
- Jeffrey McManus calls out Sun’s promise to continue to support non-Java programming languages in MySQL. Kaj Arnö of MySQL makes the point emphatically, reciting a list of operating systems and development environments/languages MySQL will continue to support.
- Matt Asay quite reasonably interprets Sun’s move as a bid for overall leadership and development of the open source software platform industry. I would add that Sun CEO Jonathon Schwartz came up through the software side of the business. I would further add that Sun has a dismal track record with closed-source software acquisitions, including Forte’, NetDynamics, and the enterprise side of Netscape.
- Matt also has selected quotes from the press conference, including Sun saying the coopetitionally obvious “Yeah, we’ll continue serious support for PostgreSQL and Oracle too.” Brian Aker also supports the PostgreSQL point.
- Zack Urlocker of MySQL implies that Jonathon Schwartz was very involved in the deal personally. That makes all kinds of sense.
- 451 Group has some interesting links, and don’t miss the short comment thread.
- The official MySQL and Sun company lines are summarized in this Zack Urlocker post on Infoworld (as well as some of the links above) and this post from Jonathon Schwartz of Sun.
| Categories: MySQL, Open source, PostgreSQL | 2 Comments |
Things could get interesting for Infobright
Of the many new specialty data warehouse DBMS and appliances, Infobright’s BrightHouse is the only leading one based on MySQL. I expect Sun and Infobright to have some interesting conversations now. Conversely, I wouldn’t be optimistic about any partnering discussions Infobright might have with, say, HP.
The most directly competitive relationship Sun now has to any future Infobright partnership is with ParAccel.
| Categories: Analytic technologies, Data warehousing, Infobright, MySQL, Open source, ParAccel | 2 Comments |
IBM acquires SolidDB to compete with Oracle TimesTen
IBM is acquiring Solid Information Technology, makers of solidDB. Some quick comments:
- solidDB is actually a very interesting hybrid disk/in-memory memory-centric database management system. However, the press release announcing the deal makes it sound as if solidDB is in-memory only.
- That strongly suggests that IBM is buying Solid mainly to compete with Oracle TimesTen. As of last June, solidDB was already IBM’s TimesTen answer via a partnership; this deal just solidifies that arrangement.
- This probably isn’t good news for Solid’s MySQL engine. That’s a pity, since solidDB technically has the potential to be the best MySQL engine around.
- Notwithstanding IBM’s presumed intentions, Solid’s main market success historically is as an embedded system in telecommunications equipment, network software, and similar systems.
- Last year I wrote a white paper on memory-centric data management, showcasing four products. IBM now has bought two of them, namely Solid’s and Applix’s (via Cognos).
- Comparisons to IBM’s embedded Java DBMS Cloudscape are pointless. That’s just a failed product vs. solidDB or Sybase SQL Anywhere, and IBM long ago cut its losses.
| Categories: Cache, Cognos, IBM and DB2, In-memory DBMS, Memory-centric data management, MySQL, OLTP, Oracle TimesTen, solidDB, Sybase | 5 Comments |
Elastra – somewhat more sensible Amazon-based DBMS option
Elastra is a startup offering MySQL and PostgreSQL SaaS instances in the Amazon S3/EC2 cloud. On their board is John Hummer, which I generally regard as a good thing, although it’s hardly a guarantee of success.* High Scalability raises some doubts about Elastra’s pricing, but I think that may be missing the point. Read more