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:
A nice EnterpriseDB replacement of MySQL
I’m going to praise EnterpriseDB’s marketing communications twice in two blog posts, because I really liked some of the crunch they put into a press release announcing a MySQL replacement at FortiusOne. To wit (emphasis mine):
The PostGIS geospatial extensions to PostgreSQL played a key role in FortiusOne’s selection of EnterpriseDB Advanced Server, a PostgreSQL-based solution, and dramatically improved performance. FortiusOne needed to run complex spatial queries against large datasets quickly and efficiently, and found the MySQL spatial extensions to be far less complete and comprehensive than PostGIS. EnterpriseDB Advanced Server processes some of GeoCommons’ database-intensive rendering requests in one-thirtieth of the time required by MySQL. During peak loads, GeoCommons processes more than one hundred thousand complex requests per hour, requiring true enterprise-class performance and scalability.
Another major factor in FortiusOne’s replacement of MySQL with EnterpriseDB Advanced Server was the company’s need for advanced partitioning, custom triggers, and functional indexing. EnterpriseDB’s advanced partitioning capabilities instantly enabled linear performance, even with tables having billions of rows.
| Categories: Data types, EnterpriseDB and Postgres Plus, GIS and geospatial, MySQL | 10 Comments |
Infobright BrightHouse — columnar, VERY compressed, simple, and related to MySQL
To a first approximation, Infobright – maker of BrightHouse — is yet another data warehouse DBMS specialist with a columnar architecture, boasting great compression and running on commodity hardware, emphasizing easy set-up, simple administration, great price-performance, and hence generally low TCO. BrightHouse isn’t actually MPP yet, but Infobright confidently promises a generally available MPP version by the end of 2008. The company says that experience shows >10:1 compression of user data is realistic – i.e., an expansion ratio that’s fractional, and indeed better than 1/10:1. Accordingly, despite the lack of shared-nothing parallelism, Infobright claims a sweet spot of 1-10 terabyte warehouses, and makes occasional references to figures up to 30 terabytes or so of user data.
BrightHouse is essentially a MySQL storage engine, and hence gets a lot of connectivity and BI tool support features from MySQL for “free.” Beyond that, Infobright’s core technical idea is to chop columns of data into 64K chunks, called data packs, and then store concise information about what’s in the packs. The more basic information is stored in data pack nodes,* one per data pack. If you’re familiar with Netezza zone maps, data pack nodes sound like zone maps on steroids. They store maximum values, minimum values, and (where meaningful) aggregates, and also encode information as to which intervals between the min and max values do or don’t contain actual data values. Read more
| Categories: Analytic technologies, Columnar database management, Data warehousing, Database compression, Infobright, MySQL, Open source | 2 Comments |
Gartner 2007 Magic Quadrant for Data Warehouse Database Management Systems
February, 2011 edit: I’ve now commented on Gartner’s 2010 Data Warehouse Database Management System Magic Quadrant as well.
It’s early autumn, the leaves are turning in New England, and Gartner has issued another Magic Quadrant for data warehouse DBMS. (Edit: As of January, 2009, that link is dead but this one works.) The big winners vs. last year are Greenplum and, secondarily, Sybase. Teradata continues to lead. Oracle has also leapfrogged IBM, and there are various other minor adjustments as well, among repeat mentionees Netezza, DATAllegro, Sand, Kognitio, and MySQL. HP isn’t on the radar yet; ditto Vertica. Read more
The four horsemen of data warehousing
I’ve been talking a lot to text mining vendors this week, as per a series of posts over on Text Technologies. Specifically, I’ve focused on the two with exhaustive extraction strategies, namely Attensity and Clarabridge. (Exhaustive extraction is Attensity’s term for separating the linguistic-analysis part of text mining from the DBMS-based BI/analytics part.)
So I asked each of Attensity and Clarabridge the side question as to which data warehouse software or appliances they were seeing. The answers were almost identical — Oracle, Microsoft SQL*Server, Teradata, and Netezza. One also mentioned MySQL and 2 HP prospects — but the HP sites were running NonStop SQL, not NeoView. Amazingly, there were no mentions of DB2. There also weren’t any mentions of the smaller specialist startups, such as DATAllegro, Greenplum, or Vertica.
SAP takes back MaxDB from MySQL
Way back in January, 2006, I wrote that MaxDB was not getting merged into MySQL. Given that, it makes sense for SAP to take back control of the product. As The Reg reports, that’s exactly what’s happening.
The bigger question is — how’s MySQL’s SAP certification coming along? Whether or not MySQL gets SAP-certified and included in the SAP product catalog will be a huge indicator of whether it’s ready for OLTP prime time.
Anybody want to place bets on which midrange OLTP DBMS gets certified for SAP first, MySQL or EnterpriseDB? MySQL has a large head start, but if my clients at EnterpriseDB have their priorities straight, they might wind up lapping MySQL even so.
| Categories: EnterpriseDB and Postgres Plus, Mid-range, MySQL, OLTP, SAP AG | 4 Comments |
Whether or not to use MySQL
CIO Magazine has a pretty superficial back-and-forth about whether or not to use MySQL in enterprises. For example, one of the strongest claims in the pro-MySQL article is the not-so-staggering observation (italics theirs)
One way MySQL achieves this scalability is through a popular feature called stored procedures, mini, precompiled routines that reside outside of the application.
And the anti-MySQL article doesn’t have much in the way of crunchiness except for the fairly well-reasoned
Most of the required features for an RDBMS are firmly in place with the release of MySQL 5.0, but we can legitimately consider the maturity of some of these features as a possible reason to shy away from MySQL. For example, the lack of views, triggers and stored procedures has historically been the major criticism of MySQL. These have all been supported by MySQL for a year or so now, but by comparison, they have been features for about 10 years in most competing RDBMSes.
This article pair got Slashdotted, and some interesting byplay ensued. The general theme was along the lines of
“MySQL is terribly deficient out of the box.”
“Yes, but if you use this new, lightly-documented add-in, that specific problem is now solved.”
| Categories: Mid-range, MySQL, OLTP | 2 Comments |
IBM’s mid-range OLTP offering gets strengthened
In the past, when I’ve asked Jeff Jones of IBM for permission to post one of his well-written notes, his response has pretty much been “Of course! Why did you bother asking?” So this time I’m just going ahead and skipping that step. The note is about IBM’s mid-range flavor of DB2, targeted directly at MySQL.
Today, IBM announced that its popular DB2 9 Express-C software is now available with an optional low-cost yearly support subscription. DB2 Express-C has been available without license charges for downloading, application development, deployment and redistribution since January 2006. It remains available without license charges for those that do not require support. Electronic general availability of the new support option is scheduled for June 1, 2007.
The new DB2 Express-C support option provides 24×7 product support, regular fixpacks and upgrade protection. In addition, this option provides support for high availability clustering, offsite disaster recovery, and data replication with remote data servers without additional charge.
Background
— Subscriptions are priced at $2,995 (U.S.) per server per year. This is identical to MySQL Enterprise Gold, but DB2 Express-C includes features not found in MySQL including pureXML support, high availability clustering (MySQL Cluster support costs extra), autonomic features, and no-charge administration and development tools. Unlike the free offerings from Microsoft and Oracle, DB2 Express-C does not place limits on the size or number of databases managed. With up to 4 GB of memory and up to 2 processors, DB2 Express-C can run on more powerful servers, can scale higher and can perform faster than its competitors. Read more
| Categories: IBM and DB2, Mid-range, MySQL, OLTP | Leave a Comment |
MySQL/IBM — will everybody please calm down?
Reuters wrote a really stupid article on the MySQL/IBM deal, and some bloggers have gotten over-excited as well. Even the not-ignorant among these seem to be overlooking one or more of the following points:
- The IBM/MySQL deal is just for the iSeries.
- The iSeries is the successor to the AS/400 and System 38, and thus is in a decades-old family of machines that have some weirdnesses in their DBMS support.
- In particular, DB2 on the iSeries isn’t the same thing as DB2 on other boxes, although multiple DB2s do at least nominally run there.
So while it’s interesting and nice, this deal isn’t that relevant to IBM’s mainstream software business at all.
Read more
| Categories: IBM and DB2, Mid-range, MySQL, OLTP, Open source | 4 Comments |
SolidDB and MySQL 5.0 – how industrial-strength in OLTP?
MySQL 4.0 is an OLTP joke. MySQL 5.0, however, shows a lot of progress in terms of real transactions, foreign keys, referential integrity, triggers, stored procedures and so on. In anticipation of the MySQL user conference next week, I got a quick briefing from Paola Lubet and Murat Demiroglu at Solid Information Technology, whose SolidDB is one of the two transactional storage engines for MySQL (the other is InnoDB, now owned by Oracle).
The layer provided by MySQL actually does most of what I think of as “language processing” – parsing, optimization, drivers, triggers, stored procedures, referential integrity, etc. SolidDB is a storage engine providing actual execution. Its features and virtues include:
• Online backup. (Note: Apparently, the extra-cost InnoDB online backup product isn’t showing up on price lists these days.)
• Optimistic (as well as pessimistic) concurrency control. This can be a good performance feature for applications that have a whole lot of Adds and very few Changes.
• General reliability. Unless they really botched the port, Solid benefits from a long history of very reliable operation.
• High availability. Scheduled for alpha in early summer and beta in the fall is a high-availability option. This initial-release will be master-slave synchronous replication. More sophisticated replication could come later on, as could memory-centric performance, if market conditions seem to warrant it (I’m betting they will).
| Categories: Mid-range, MySQL, OLTP, Open source, solidDB | 2 Comments |
Naming the DBMS disruptors
Edit: This post has largely been superseded by this more recent one defining mid-range relational DBMS.
I find myself defining a new product category – midrange OLTP/multipurpose DBMS. (Or just midrange DBMS for brevity.) Nothing earthshaking here; I’m simply referring to those products that: Read more