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:

April 22, 2009

MySQL miscellany

For a guy who doesn’t go to the MySQL conference and routinely gets flamed by the MySQL community for being insufficiently adoring of their beloved product, I sure have been putting up a lot of MySQL-related posts recently. Here’s another, zooming through a few different topics. Read more

April 21, 2009

I don’t see why the GPL would be a major barrier to a useful MySQL fork

I posted suggesting that substantial elements of the MySQL community should throw their weight behind MySQL forks. Mike Olson of Cloudera helpfully pointed out, on Twitter and by email, how the GPL could appear to stand in the way of such an effort. But would it really?

Currently, any version of the MySQL code that isn’t proprietary to the MySQL company — which is owned by Sun and hence expected to be owned soon by Oracle — is covered by GPL 2. That license states (emphasis mine):

Activities other than copying, distribution and modification are not covered by this License; they are outside its scope. The act of running the Program is not restricted,

Hence it is hard for me to see how the MySQL company could in any way hinder another software vendor from saying “Please buy my software, then go download a free copy of GPLed MySQL and run the two together.”*

Read more

April 20, 2009

This week is a REALLY good time to actively strengthen the MySQL forkers

As my first three posts on the Oracle/Sun merger suggested, I think Oracle will do a better job with MySQL product development than Sun has.  But of course that’s a low hurdle.  And so it leaves open the questions:

What should and/or will be the most widely adopted code lines of MySQL (or other open source DBMS),

especially for the types of users and vendors who are engaged with MySQL (as opposed to principal alternative PostgreSQL) today?

As much as I’ve bashed MySQL/MyISAM and MySQL/InnoDB for being low-quality general-purpose DBMS, I’d still hate to see MySQL-based development stall out. There are a number of MySQL engine providers with rather unique technology, that deserve a good front-end partner to build their products with.  The high-volume sharding guys deserve the chance to continue down their current path as well.  And so does the low-end mass market — although I’m least worried about them, as I can’t imagine any realistic scenario in which Oracle doesn’t offer a version of MySQL fully suited to support 10s of millions of WordPress and Joomla installations.

So far as I can tell, there are only four real and currently active candidates for MySQL code coordinator:

Patrick Galbraith and Steven Vaughan-Nichols did good jobs of illustrating the turmoil.

Oracle isn’t a very comfortable partner long term for the storage engine vendors, and Drizzle doesn’t seem to be what they need. So I think that Infobright, Kickfire, Tokutek, Calpont, et al. need to get aligned in a hurry with an outside MySQL provider such as Percona or MariaDB or a newcomer, preferably all with the same one.  Yes, I understand that Infobright is getting a lot of marketing help from Sun these days, that Kickfire just got a nice-sounding Sun marketing announcement as well, and so on. But the time to start working toward the inevitable future is now.

And by “now” I mean “right now,” since the MySQL community is at this moment gathered together for its annual conference.

April 20, 2009

MySQL storage engine round-up, with Oracle-related thoughts

Here’s what I know about MySQL storage engines, more or less.

April 20, 2009

Should the Oracle/MySQL combo face antitrust opposition?

Oracle is a powerhouse in database management systems, but it’s hardly a monopolist. IBM revels in contriving figures that show it to have market share comparable to Oracle’s, and Microsoft has a very solid position as well.  Smaller players like Teradata, Sybase, and MySQL are also thriving. And of course there’s a whole wave of newer DBMS companies, from Netezza on, showing that the DBMS industry isn’t even the secure oligopoly it appeared to be earlier this decade.

However, it’s certainly legitimate to define a product category of “real” DBMS that includes everything from MySQL on up, but not Microsoft Access and other low-end data management products.  In that universe, while MySQL is a trivial addition to Oracle’s revenue, it’s a huge increment to Oracle’s unit market share.  A merged Oracle/MySQL will dwarf the competition in ways that Oracle or MySQL alone don’t.  Read more

April 20, 2009

First thoughts on Oracle acquiring Sun

More later.  I have a radio interview in a few minutes on a very different subject.

April 20, 2009

Calpont update — you read it here first!

Calpont has gone through a lot of strategy iterations since its founding. The super-short version is that Calpont originally planned an appliance built around a SQL chip, much like Kickfire. But after various changes in management and venture backing, Calpont turned itself into a software-only analytic DBMS vendor relying on a MySQL front end. Calpont is now at the stage of announcing an Early Adopter program at the MySQL conference on Wednesday, although details of Calpont’s product release timing, pricing, feature set, etc. are all To Be Determined.

Minor highlights of the Calpont technical story include: Read more

April 20, 2009

Infobright update

For the past couple of quarters, Infobright has been MySQL’s partner of choice for larger data warehousing applications. Infobright’s stated business metrics, and I quote, include:

  • > 50 Customers in 7 Countries

  • > 25 Partners on 4 continents

  • A vibrant open source community

    • +1 million visitors

    • Approaching 10,000 downloads

    • 2,000 active community participants

These may be compared with analogous metrics Infobright offered in February.

Infobright has also made or promised a variety of technological enhancements. Ones that are either shipping now or promised soon include: Read more

April 16, 2009

Introduction to Tokutek

Tokutek has a paradoxical pitch: Tokutek writes data particularly quickly, and therefore you’re supposed to buy Tokutek for query-oriented uses. Highlights of the Tokutek story include:

Tokutek’s initial target market is the usual combination of clickstream/personalization/other network management. The idea is that many data warehouse technologies have trouble getting latency below, say, 15 seconds to 5 minutes, at least at very high update volumes. So if immediacy is more important than raw complex query performance, Tokutek’s performance profile could be attractive. Read more

April 2, 2009

Ingres update

I talked with Ingres today. Much of the call was fluff — open-source rah-rah, plus some numbers showing purported success, but so finely parsed as to be pretty meaningless. (To Ingres’ credit, they did offer to let me talk w/ their CFO, even if they offered no promises as to whether he’d offer any more substantive information.) Highlights included: Read more

← Previous PageNext Page →

Feed: DBMS (database management system), DW (data warehousing), BI (business intelligence), and analytics technology Subscribe to the Monash Research feed via RSS or email:

Login

Search our blogs and white papers

Monash Research blogs

User consulting

Building a short list? Refining your strategic plan? We can help.

Vendor advisory

We tell vendors what's happening -- and, more important, what they should do about it.

Monash Research highlights

Learn about white papers, webcasts, and blog highlights, by RSS or email.