Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?
Databases Open Source Oracle Sun Microsystems

MySQL's Creator On Why the Future Belongs To MariaDB 208

angry tapir writes "When Oracle purchased Sun, many in the open source community were bleak about the future of MySQL. According to MySQL co-creator Michael "Monty" Widenius, these fears have been proven by Oracle's attitude to MySQL and its community. In the wake of the Sun takeover, Monty forked MySQL to create MariaDB, which has picked up momentum (being included by default in Fedora, Open SUSE and, most recently, Slackware). I recently interviewed Monty about what he learned from the MySQL experience and the current state of MariaDB."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

MySQL's Creator On Why the Future Belongs To MariaDB

Comments Filter:
  • by Peetke ( 1681018 ) on Thursday March 28, 2013 @08:18AM (#43301649)
    Arch Linux also made the switch three days ago: https://www.archlinux.org/news/mariadb-replaces-mysql-in-repositories/ [archlinux.org]
  • stirring the pot (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 28, 2013 @08:18AM (#43301653)

    Personally I think the future belongs to Postgres. :)

    • Word. I prefer Postgres. But then again I have not done a comparison in a very long time. I know that MySQL (and by extension MariaDB) has been ACID compliant for several years if you pick the right backend, but does anyone know if either supports Views and stored procedures?

      • Re:stirring the pot (Score:5, Informative)

        by dmgxmichael ( 1219692 ) on Thursday March 28, 2013 @08:50AM (#43301863) Homepage
        Both support views and stored procedures and have since version 5.
      • by drfrog ( 145882 )

        just because something is popular doesnt make it the right choice

        AFAIK mysql/maria still relies on innodb for transactions ! plus all the myriad of mysql type mishandling of null values.
        its a horror show of popularity.

        use a proper database and stop having to work around dysfunctional programming

        • Re:stirring the pot (Score:4, Informative)

          by CastrTroy ( 595695 ) on Thursday March 28, 2013 @10:50AM (#43302991) Homepage
          Actually MariaDB and Percona both support XtraDB which is a transactional backend that's a drop in replacement for InnoDB. MariaDB also supports the new Aria storage engine which can be both transactional and non-transactional depending on your needs (determined by option in Create Table statement).
        • by wmac1 ( 2478314 )

          1- Popularity among technical people "might sometimes" mean more people have found the specific product suits them.

          2- MySQL is available on almost every shared and dedicated hosting service. PostgreSQL is rarely available on shared services. I have developed a small web based ERP but I was forced to go with MySQL since most of my potential customers would want to run it on shared services.

          3- dysfunctional programming?!

    • As a long-time MySQL fan... yes. PostgreSQL is better in basically every way.
  • In other words (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward

    Oracle is now behaving like Monty's old company MySQL AB, trying to force volume users to pay to play. Remember MySQL AB's rigid enforcement of the GPL, with a dual licensing option? I wonder if MariaDB is subject to the same type of licensing games.

  • by Anonymous Coward

    Nice dream.

  • by Richard_at_work ( 517087 ) <richardprice@gm a i l . com> on Thursday March 28, 2013 @08:31AM (#43301733)

    The part he left unsaid was "MariaDB is the future because that's where I will make my money".

    Remember, this is the guy that tried to get a merger court to give him the rights to MySQL back again after he sold them to Sun for a nice sum of money.

  • by CastrTroy ( 595695 ) on Thursday March 28, 2013 @08:39AM (#43301775) Homepage
    I would like to know what specifically Oracle is doing so badly. I've been watching MySQL for a while as we use it at work, and it seems that a lot of advancements have been made in MySQL since the Oracle takeover. They've released 5.5 and 5.6. They haven't let it stagnate. They've released a ton of new features. They still have the free version easily available on their website. It seems like their prices have gone up if you want the supported version, but there are other providers out there.
    • by Xest ( 935314 ) on Thursday March 28, 2013 @09:12AM (#43302057)

      Yeah, I wouldn't use MySQL regardless for anything serious, but I've still played around with it and used it for prototype projects, and frankly the .NET connector and GUI management tools have made far more progress under Oracle than they were making beforehand.

      That's not to defend Oracle either of course, but I think it's unfair to say Oracle has let MySQL stagnate, they haven't, and that's not a reason to ditch MySQL. The fact Oracle are scum and that MySQL is still crap regardless are better reasons to ditch MySQL, but certainly not lack of progress.

      • I think that MySQL is a great database that suffers from a bad reputation due to a lot of history. Stay away from MyISAM, and it can be a great database. I find it actually does a few key things a lot better than some of their competitors, and you can always start out for free, which is a big advantage for start-ups. Postgres is just about the only other free alternative but has a lot of issues of it's own. Someone pointed out MySQL installer not working, well, if you want to complain about Postgres, h
        • by Xest ( 935314 )

          When I lost faith in it professionally was when I used to use it (was with InnoDB btw) was when a database we'd had running for about 9 months randomly corrupted itself forcing the service to crash and stop.

          I could fix the corrupt files with the command line tools, but it then repeated a few days later.

          The best I could track it down to was a DELETE FROM query it didn't like for some reason (there was nothing particularly special about it) that would arbitrarily cause the corruption.

          I just couldn't justify i

    • For quite some time Oracle couldn't even make a working Windows installer (when it tried to set up the root password and similar stuff you had to kill the installer and complete the last steps manually).

      If a company can't even get a fucking installer to work I certainly don't want to find out which parts of the database engine they managed to break.

    • by gidoca ( 2726773 ) on Thursday March 28, 2013 @09:29AM (#43302177)
      It's mainly a problem for Linux distributors: they stopped providing things like regression tests and security advisories. Source: https://mailman.archlinux.org/pipermail/arch-dev-public/2013-February/024478.html [archlinux.org]
    • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward

      Oracle didn't release patches to fix undisclosed security problems and forced Debian to release a new version of MySQL. Oracle don't work well with distribution package maintainers. Do they expect distributions to release a new vanilla MySQL package every time Oracle says they have fixed some undisclosed problems?

      Due to the non-disclosure of security patch information from Oracle, we are forced to ship an upstream version update of MySQL 5.1. There are several known incompatible changes, which are listed in...


    • The only thing Oracle is doing wrong is thinking that no one could be bold enough to try and sell the same product twice.

      It's a gutsy move. It really is. Sell MySQL to Sun. Claim Sun's purchaser is doing __________ (fill in the blank with whatever evil nasty thing you like) with it. But that's ok, MariaDB will save you from that. Distributions flood to it to get away from the nasty big evil corporation, and suddenly Monty has legally taken back control of what he sold for a cool billion dollars.

      The bes

  • Why isn't there an audio of this interview? This should be routine now. While I appreciate efforts to provide this dialogue, I hope the author(s) don't expect that folks will always want to read through all the verbiage.

    I would have been able to listen to the interview while on my way to work. But thanks anyway and sorry, I had to get this off my chest.

    • by rvw ( 755107 )

      Why isn't there an audio of this interview? This should be routine now. While I appreciate efforts to provide this dialogue, I hope the author(s) don't expect that folks will always want to read through all the verbiage.

      I would have been able to listen to the interview while on my way to work. But thanks anyway and sorry, I had to get this off my chest.

      You know, with MariaDB, confessions are still confidential. When this one is sold to Microsoft or Apple, JesusDB will support speech input and output and it can communicate with AngelDB and stuff. Only when goDB will be around, it will answer questions like this itself on slashdot.

    • because the demand for unedited audio is low enough that it's not usually worth the effort of authors to provide it - and if you include doing voiceovers for the author's own commentary, which generally happens after the interview is complete and the author has the time to verify and rebut statements made by the interviewee, you're talking about a LOT more work than simply putting out a text-based article.

      You could always try text-to-speech.

    • Yeah... my lips get tired too when I have to read a long news article

  • by Anonymous Coward

    Without the GPL, Mariadb would not exist.

    • IIRC mysql try to claim the GPL applies not just to their client libraries but to any reimpmentation of their protocol. So even if you didn't use their client libraries your software still had to be GPL.

      http://mysqlha.blogspot.co.uk/2010/03/can-protocol-be-gpl.html [blogspot.co.uk]

      Is that term enforcable? will oracle try to enforce it? I don't know but I do know that it's enough to make me wary of using mySQL or any fork thereof in anything I design in future.

  • Oracles purchased of MySQL never made sense: A popular but very lightweight database? I once used it on an enterprise project and it was too buggy and had terrible locking and reliability problems. If your database is down you're losing lots of money - we lost $50K an hour. InnoDB helped a bit, but in the end we found it MySQL unworkable and moved to PostgreSQL. Oracle is an enterprise company which makes kazillions selling enterprise software to, you know, enterprises. Maybe some ill-informed executive tho
    • Oracle didn't buy Sun for MySQL, it bought it for Java. Everything else was a distraction that it now has to do something with.

    • by Xest ( 935314 )

      If you were making $50k an hour, is there any reason you were using lightweight databases in the first place when given that income you could've trivially just stumped up for something a bit more reliable like Oracle or MSSQL Server?

      • by RevDisk ( 740008 )
        You're claiming MsSQL is more stable than MySQL? Wow. Uhm. Yea, no. MSSQL has plenty of useful features, mostly being developer friendly. I've used MySQL in enterprise environments, without significant issues. Oracle I'd only consider if I had more money than sense, and felt like burning it for lack of any better ideas.
        • by Xest ( 935314 ) on Thursday March 28, 2013 @12:58PM (#43304263)

          The thing that never ceases to amaze me about Slashdot is that you can say the most uncontroversial thing and there will always be somewhere there to tell you you are wrong. You can say the world isn't flat and there will be someone here to tell you it is.

          You are that guy, the guy telling me the world is flat.

          Really, if you think MySQL is comparable to MSSQL in terms of stability then you really just shouldn't be working with databases at all. MSSQL and MySQL aren't even in the same class.

    • by jbolden ( 176878 )

      Any database worth $50k / hr or even $5k / hr should be on Oracle or DB2. MySQL is for databases at the $500 / hr or less.

  • "Although MySQL is still widely used — Db-engines.com ranks it as the third most popular RDBMS after Oracle and Microsoft SQL Server, compared to MariaDB coming in at #35 — "

    They should had read their methodology [db-engines.com] before citing them wrong. It is not what is more used (as mysql is basically the default db used by most popular web apps, should be more in the order of popularity of php than in the oracle, like it or not) but what have more active discussion around in certain circles. Even if you th

  • Although (irrespective if we believe the specific numbers or not) ~1% of desktop users are Linux users, I think that 1% is a very significant one containing much of the people doing community contributions to open source projects (either patches or good bug reports). Because of this, I think the fate of the two ex-Sun projects OpenOffice and MySQL is very uncertain, despite having a massively higher user share thanks to MacOSX and Windows users and an established brand. Long-term, I think the developer mind share is more significant and that is obtained by being the default option in various Linux distros.
  • Founder and head of software project claims the future belongs to them. News at 11.

(null cookie; hope that's ok)