Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Databases Open Source Oracle

Drizzle's Future Moving To Rackspace? 41

Posted by CmdrTaco
from the free-range-coders dept.
abartels writes "It seems like there's been nothing but bad news and resignations coming from Oracle since it finally managed to close the deal on Sun. Finally, there's good news in that Drizzle seems to have a bright future ahead. It just isn't with Oracle, but with the Rackspace Cloud."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Drizzle's Future Moving To Rackspace?

Comments Filter:
  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 11, 2010 @01:35PM (#31440404)

    Sure, the Drizzle crew has made some minor changes, but Drizzle is essentially still MySQL. That means it still has many of MySQL's many, many flaws and thousands of unfixed bugs.

    Their work is interesting and innovative, but they should have built it off of PostgreSQL or even SQLite, rather than MySQL. I'm well aware of the developer connections with MySQL, but that's no reason to continue using what should be a dead project due to its lack of quality.

  • by moderatorrater (1095745) on Thursday March 11, 2010 @01:43PM (#31440534)
    My understanding was that Drizzle was created partly to get it out from under Sun and other corporations. Seems like saying it doesn't have a future with Oracle is like saying that postgres doesn't have a future with Oracle.

    It will be too bad if Drizzle's the only place where exciting development takes place on the MySQL base. Say what you will about MySQL, there are a lot of shops that rely on it and would love to see it come closer to parity with other database programs.
  • PostreSQL (Score:3, Insightful)

    by aztracker1 (702135) on Thursday March 11, 2010 @01:55PM (#31440724) Homepage
    Queue the mass migration... Then again there's Firebird, or all the document (Couch, Mongo, Divan) and object NoSQL databases too.
  • by mmsimanga (775213) <mmsimanga AT gmail DOT com> on Thursday March 11, 2010 @02:05PM (#31440880) Homepage

    but that's no reason to continue using what should be a dead project due to its lack of quality.

    Maybe the user base of millions upon millions of web sites is enough motivation to continue developing developing the "low quality" project.

  • by PCM2 (4486) on Thursday March 11, 2010 @04:32PM (#31443590) Homepage

    Sure, but as a practical matter, until that $7/month hosting provider offers PostgreSQL as an option instead of MySQL, and then Wordpress will install with a couple clicks and set up its own tables on PostgreSQL... until that happens, Joe Sixpack who just wants to host his own blog isn't going to be interested in PostgreSQL. And if Joe Sixpack isn't interested, and he's the customer, why should a hosting provider push him toward PostgreSQL?

    Furthermore, is Wordpress so terrible, running as it does on countless sites, that we must save it from MySQL? As another AC poster said, "Blogs with cached content that make a DB query every 10 minutes aren't a real test of quality." OK fine, but that argument sounds pretty much like saying, "MySQL does absolutely everything a trivial Wordpress site needs to do, and flawlessly, and MySQL is available for free everywhere, therefore we must pull out all the MySQL code from Wordpress and replace it with PostgreSQL." It doesn't hold water.

    A programmer who tries to use MySQL for things it isn't suited for is going to end up feeling dumb. A non-techy customer who tries to use MySQL for things it's very well-suited for will end up feeling like he's master of his own destiny. Let's not confuse the two.

At the source of every error which is blamed on the computer you will find at least two human errors, including the error of blaming it on the computer.

Working...