not like Red Hat
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| hughesjr Aug 15, 2007 4:49 AM EDT |
This is not like Red Hat ... MySQL's previous policy (have an enterprise version that they sell +++AND+++ still publicly provide the sources) was like the Red Hat and Fedora policy. This policy is more like the Novell/SLES policy. (You can not get the sources from us unless you pay) If Red Hat had this policy, CentOS would not have been able to exist ... at least not very easily. This MySQL policy also affects CentOS as CentOS does distribute the latest "Enterprise" version of MySQL in the CentOSPlus repository, however Jeremy Cole (mentioned in the article and a previous MySQL employee) has indicated that he will provide access to the tarballs to CentOS (and everyone else) via his website and he is a paying customer who still has access. CentOS will continue to provide these tarballs in our CentOSPlus SRPMS of MySQL as well (as long as we can get them). |
| rijelkentaurus Aug 15, 2007 7:27 AM EDT |
Red Hat is a savvy company. Provide the product, in a certain form, for free, and get people to know it, to understand it, to like it, and to prefer it. Then when a geek is faced with actually purchasing support for something down the line...hey, why not Red Hat? It's sort of like when MS turned a blind eye to pirated Windows...they didn't care, it kept people using them and not someone else. That's really Red Hat's stance, and part of the reason they stand atop the commercial Linux world. This is something that can only hurt MySQL in the long run, there are still other databases that are free to have and work with, such as PostgreSQL and Firebird. It's also a worthy endeavor to take up a collection for CentOS to pay for a MySQL subscription to have access to the sources, which are GPL and can be freely distributed. Maybe. Or just use PostgreSQL. MySQL (as I understand things) is much faster in a lightweight web application or to server up PHP web pages, but when used in a "real" database application (to compete with the likes of SQL Server or Oracle), it quickly loses its speed advantage, and PostgreSQL starts to look quite nice in its own right. Anyway, I am very new to databases and I could be way off base. And I am now rambling. Bye. |
| dinotrac Aug 15, 2007 7:45 AM EDT |
>Or just use PostgreSQL. MySQL (as I understand things) is much faster in a lightweight web application or to server up PHP web pages, I think that's still true, but, over the years it's become more of a mantra than a fact. As MySQL has gained more capabiities, it has slowed down. Oh, I think the basic MySQL is still plenty fast, but if you start using InnoDB and a little fancyness, it drops down a notch. At the same time, postgresql just keeps getting faster. That, I think, is the benefit of starting out with a serious database and proceeding to make it better instead of having to bulk out a very lightweight offering. MySQL is better at more things than some people give it credit for. Ditto for postgresql. |
| herzeleid Aug 15, 2007 7:59 AM EDT |
> This policy is more like the Novell/SLES policy. (You can not get the sources from us unless you pay) That's funny, this SLES you speak of seems to be downloadable. They're just not giving free support forever to all comers, which seems reasonable to me. |
| herzeleid Aug 15, 2007 8:04 AM EDT |
> As MySQL has gained more capabiities, it has slowed down. Examples? I had not seen any slowdown. > Oh, I think the basic MySQL is still plenty fast, but if you start using InnoDB and a little fancyness, it drops down a notch. I've found quite the opposite - running innodb is way faster than the old myisam, since you can do row level locking, wherease with myisam, you could only lock a whole table, a major performance hit on a busy db. I have heard that postgres made good performance gains in recent versions, to the point that it is considered by some to be now in the same ballpark as mysql, a laudable achievement. |
| dinotrac Aug 15, 2007 8:40 AM EDT |
>a major performance hit on a busy db. Depends on your application. Lots of web applications are, for all intents and purposes, read-only. |
| jsusanka Aug 16, 2007 4:42 AM EDT |
anybody remember when oracle bought InnoDB stuff - don't know if I remember right but this does not pass the sniff test. just did a google search; http://jeremy.zawodny.com/blog/archives/005490.html |
Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]
Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!