Save MySQL? HA

Andrew,

I don't think it's becoming of the Postgres community to gloat about
this. Your contention that MySQL will "get flushed down the drain"
sounds almost as misguided as Monty's contention that Oracle will
divest in, and ultimately somehow "kill" MySQL as a means of cornering
the RDBMS market.

The reason that MySQL can boast having so many installs is because it
is used in shared hosting shops around the world. I really strongly
doubt that Oracle are entertaining the idea of moving those sorts of
MySQL users (i.e. the majority) over to Oracle database - they want to
find a way to extract money from them, if that's possible. They
certainly won't have a monopoly on supporting MySQL that they can use
as leverage. Even if Oracle *could* somehow kill MySQL, I think it's
extremely unlikely that they'd be the beneficiary, and they know it. I
say this as someone who is largely indifferent to what happens to
MySQL, beyond the ramifications for PostgreSQL.

Regards,
Peter Geoghegan

-----Original Message-----
From: pgsql-general-owner@postgresql.org [mailto:pgsql-general-
owner@postgresql.org] On Behalf Of Peter Geoghegan
Sent: Thursday, December 31, 2009 8:23 PM
To: Andrew Lardinois
Cc: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Save MySQL? HA

Andrew,

I don't think it's becoming of the Postgres community to gloat about
this. Your contention that MySQL will "get flushed down the drain"
sounds almost as misguided as Monty's contention that Oracle will
divest in, and ultimately somehow "kill" MySQL as a means of cornering
the RDBMS market.

The reason that MySQL can boast having so many installs is because it
is used in shared hosting shops around the world. I really strongly
doubt that Oracle are entertaining the idea of moving those sorts of
MySQL users (i.e. the majority) over to Oracle database - they want to
find a way to extract money from them, if that's possible. They
certainly won't have a monopoly on supporting MySQL that they can use
as leverage. Even if Oracle *could* somehow kill MySQL, I think it's
extremely unlikely that they'd be the beneficiary, and they know it. I
say this as someone who is largely indifferent to what happens to
MySQL, beyond the ramifications for PostgreSQL.

I suspect that Oracle could be interested in collection of revenue from
MySQL users who are using it commercially without a license in violation
of the current license agreement for MySQL. (Commercial use of MySQL
without paying a license fee requires that projects using the database
are also GPL, IIRC).

Just a wild guess, of course.

Dann Corbit wrote:

I suspect that Oracle could be interested in collection of revenue from
MySQL users who are using it commercially without a license in violation
of the current license agreement for MySQL. (Commercial use of MySQL
without paying a license fee requires that projects using the database
are also GPL, IIRC)

I'm pretty sure this only applies to commercial software thats
distributed -with- MySQL

On Thu, Dec 31, 2009 at 7:20 PM, Andrew Lardinois <lardinois@gmail.com> wrote:

Can't help myself, but I've used mysql in the past, and got on a list of
some sort once upon a time about that.  Just received an email petition from
Monty to help save mysql.  Certainly you know the story:  Oracle buys Sun,
which currently owns mysql, and the little dolphin get's flushed down the
drain.  Perhaps they should watch The Cove, a documentary about dolphins
biting the dust.

Be nice! I really think that Oracle owning MySQL could be the best
thing to happen to it. If they put even a tiny percentage of their
programming man power behind it they could have one of the fastest
key-value databases in myisam storage, which is very useful for
certain types of apps. They could also fix a lot of long standing
mental retardation that's been allowed to live on forever (innodb
tables ignoring column level FK constraints, no FTS on innodb etc).

If they got it to the point that all the parts that burn with the
stupid were fixed, it would be useful as a sales tool, step up kinda
thing.

Monty made his be, let him lie in it.

On Thu, 2009-12-31 at 21:08 -0800, John R Pierce wrote:

Dann Corbit wrote:

I suspect that Oracle could be interested in collection of revenue from
MySQL users who are using it commercially without a license in violation
of the current license agreement for MySQL. (Commercial use of MySQL
without paying a license fee requires that projects using the database
are also GPL, IIRC)

I'm pretty sure this only applies to commercial software thats
distributed -with- MySQL

Guys, this is wholly off-topic.

Joshua D. Drake

--
PostgreSQL.org Major Contributor
Command Prompt, Inc: http://www.commandprompt.com/ - 503.667.4564
Consulting, Training, Support, Custom Development, Engineering
Respect is earned, not gained through arbitrary and repetitive use or Mr. or Sir.

Monty made his be, let him lie in it.

I repeat, this if off-topic. Please drop it.

Joshua D. Drake

--
PostgreSQL - XMPP: jdrake(at)jabber(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Consulting, Development, Support, Training
503-667-4564 - http://www.commandprompt.com/
The PostgreSQL Company, serving since 1997

DCorbit@connx.com ("Dann Corbit") writes:

(Commercial use of MySQL without paying a license fee requires that
projects using the database are also GPL, IIRC).

I know I've seen Monty say this sort of thing a lot of times, and his
most recent rant
(<http://monty-says.blogspot.com/2009/12/help-keep-internet-free.html&gt;)
underlines it with his mistaken belief.

He indicates, without any documentation of it, that there's some special
"GPL exception" in Linux licensing, otherwise, presumably, commercial
use of Linux would require, um, paying Linus or RMS or ??? some
licensing fee for the "proprietary version."

"While Linux is indeed distributed under the GPL, as is MySQL, Linux
has an exception that allows anyone to run any kind of applications
(including closed source applications) on top of Linux."

You're not misreading what Monty said, but I think what he wrote was
self-serving (to his ex-company) nonsense.
--
select 'cbbrowne' || '@' || 'acm.org';
http://linuxfinances.info/info/slony.html
Yes, for sparkling white chip prints, use low SUDSing DRAW....

Chris Browne wrote:

DCorbit@connx.com ("Dann Corbit") writes:

(Commercial use of MySQL without paying a license fee requires that
projects using the database are also GPL, IIRC).

I know I've seen Monty say this sort of thing a lot of times, and his
most recent rant
(<http://monty-says.blogspot.com/2009/12/help-keep-internet-free.html&gt;)
underlines it with his mistaken belief.

I've heard that if you write a non-GPL program talking to a MySQL
database in, say, PHP, does not require the program itself being GPL,
only the PHP library that connects to MySQL. It's the library that
"links" to MySQL, not your program, so your program is protected from
GPL's viral nature.

--
Alvaro Herrera

In response to Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>:

Chris Browne wrote:

DCorbit@connx.com ("Dann Corbit") writes:

(Commercial use of MySQL without paying a license fee requires that
projects using the database are also GPL, IIRC).

I know I've seen Monty say this sort of thing a lot of times, and his
most recent rant
(<http://monty-says.blogspot.com/2009/12/help-keep-internet-free.html&gt;)
underlines it with his mistaken belief.

I've heard that if you write a non-GPL program talking to a MySQL
database in, say, PHP, does not require the program itself being GPL,
only the PHP library that connects to MySQL. It's the library that
"links" to MySQL, not your program, so your program is protected from
GPL's viral nature.

Which makes sense if you read the license, but has never been upheld in
a court of law, thus is still on shaky legal ground.

--
Bill Moran
http://www.potentialtech.com
http://people.collaborativefusion.com/~wmoran/

On Mon, 2010-01-04 at 12:36 -0500, Bill Moran wrote:

In response to Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>:

Chris Browne wrote:

DCorbit@connx.com ("Dann Corbit") writes:

(Commercial use of MySQL without paying a license fee requires that
projects using the database are also GPL, IIRC).

I know I've seen Monty say this sort of thing a lot of times, and his
most recent rant
(<http://monty-says.blogspot.com/2009/12/help-keep-internet-free.html&gt;)
underlines it with his mistaken belief.

I've heard that if you write a non-GPL program talking to a MySQL
database in, say, PHP, does not require the program itself being GPL,
only the PHP library that connects to MySQL. It's the library that
"links" to MySQL, not your program, so your program is protected from
GPL's viral nature.

Which makes sense if you read the license, but has never been upheld in
a court of law, thus is still on shaky legal ground.

Can we move this thread to someplace relevant? This really has no place
on this list.

Joshua D. Drake

--
PostgreSQL.org Major Contributor
Command Prompt, Inc: http://www.commandprompt.com/ - 503.667.4564
Consulting, Training, Support, Custom Development, Engineering
Respect is earned, not gained through arbitrary and repetitive use or Mr. or Sir.

Maybe move this to the mysql mailing list ;)

On Mon, Jan 4, 2010 at 11:38 AM, Joshua D. Drake <jd@commandprompt.com>wrote: