Thread: best analysis of Oracle-Innobase I've seen
For those who just can't get enough of this topic: http://www.infoworld.com/article/05/10/24/43OPopenent_1.html Cheers, Ned
On Tue, 2005-10-25 at 13:34, Ned Lilly wrote: > For those who just can't get enough of this topic: > > http://www.infoworld.com/article/05/10/24/43OPopenent_1.html > Maybe this will get more people interested in the idea that the oracle purchase of innobase could be a bad thing for postgresql. If oracle uses my$ql as a cheap promotional tool, they can probably keep a strong hold on the entry level space and also provide a direct migration path into the high-end markets. This helps cut postgresql (as well as ibm and m$) out of the loop even further, something oracle would be more than happy to do. Robert Treat -- Build A Brighter Lamp :: Linux Apache {middleware} PostgreSQL
xzilla@users.sourceforge.net (Robert Treat) writes: > On Tue, 2005-10-25 at 13:34, Ned Lilly wrote: >> For those who just can't get enough of this topic: >> >> http://www.infoworld.com/article/05/10/24/43OPopenent_1.html >> > > Maybe this will get more people interested in the idea that the oracle > purchase of innobase could be a bad thing for postgresql. If oracle uses > my$ql as a cheap promotional tool, they can probably keep a strong hold > on the entry level space and also provide a direct migration path into > the high-end markets. This helps cut postgresql (as well as ibm and m$) > out of the loop even further, something oracle would be more than happy > to do. That is a compelling article, indeed. The two bits that seem most pointed: 1. Owning InnoDB will give Oracle some really accurate market share statistics on its use for "commercially interesting" purposes. 2. Bug reports that come in will provide similarly pointed precise information as to what organizations are "pushing the envelope" and that represent the best targets for marketing of Oracle's other products. It is worth observing that the same is likely true, albeit probably of somewhat less importance, if we apply the following substitutions: s/InnoDB/MaxDB/g s/Oracle/MySQL AB/g -- select 'cbbrowne' || '@' || 'acm.org'; http://cbbrowne.com/info/unix.html If you're in a vehicle going the speed of light, what happens when you turn on the headlights?
Since when is MySQL "very reliable"? :) Anyway, another interesting theory: http://www.vnunet.com/vnunet/news/2144466/oracle-preparing-launch-open On Tue, Oct 25, 2005 at 01:34:35PM -0400, Ned Lilly wrote: > For those who just can't get enough of this topic: > > http://www.infoworld.com/article/05/10/24/43OPopenent_1.html > > Cheers, > Ned > > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- > TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives? > > http://archives.postgresql.org > -- Jim C. Nasby, Sr. Engineering Consultant jnasby@pervasive.com Pervasive Software http://pervasive.com work: 512-231-6117 vcard: http://jim.nasby.net/pervasive.vcf cell: 512-569-9461
Don't know if the author knows this to be true, or if it was just an overly broad assumption, but the way he described theaudit capability Innobase (and now Oracle) has over MySQL was surprising: "One, it gains accurate accounting of MySQL's market share (because InnoDB ships with every copy). Two, and more importantly,it gains access to the list of MySQL customers who need InnoDB support -- in other words, those specific customerswho want the enterprise-class features Oracle has provided for years." That's a heck of a licensing agreement; if MySQL agreed to those terms, then shame on them even more! In return for lettingme borrow your technology, here's everything you need to know about my customers and my business, as well as a bigpile of money. Chris Browne wrote: > xzilla@users.sourceforge.net (Robert Treat) writes: > >>On Tue, 2005-10-25 at 13:34, Ned Lilly wrote: >> >>>For those who just can't get enough of this topic: >>> >>>http://www.infoworld.com/article/05/10/24/43OPopenent_1.html >>> >> >>Maybe this will get more people interested in the idea that the oracle >>purchase of innobase could be a bad thing for postgresql. If oracle uses >>my$ql as a cheap promotional tool, they can probably keep a strong hold >>on the entry level space and also provide a direct migration path into >>the high-end markets. This helps cut postgresql (as well as ibm and m$) >>out of the loop even further, something oracle would be more than happy >>to do. > > > That is a compelling article, indeed. > > The two bits that seem most pointed: > > 1. Owning InnoDB will give Oracle some really accurate market share > statistics on its use for "commercially interesting" purposes. > > 2. Bug reports that come in will provide similarly pointed precise > information as to what organizations are "pushing the envelope" > and that represent the best targets for marketing of Oracle's > other products. > > It is worth observing that the same is likely true, albeit probably of > somewhat less importance, if we apply the following substitutions: > > s/InnoDB/MaxDB/g > s/Oracle/MySQL AB/g
This report at Gartner has some different points of view: http://www.gartner.com/DisplayDocument?doc_cd=132762
ned@nedscape.com (Ned Lilly) writes: > Don't know if the author knows this to be true, or if it was just an > overly broad assumption, but the way he described the audit > capability Innobase (and now Oracle) has over MySQL was surprising: > > "One, it gains accurate accounting of MySQL's market share (because > InnoDB ships with every copy). Two, and more importantly, it gains > access to the list of MySQL customers who need InnoDB support -- in > other words, those specific customers who want the enterprise-class > features Oracle has provided for years." > > That's a heck of a licensing agreement; if MySQL agreed to those > terms, then shame on them even more! In return for letting me > borrow your technology, here's everything you need to know about my > customers and my business, as well as a big pile of money. Why should this seem overly surprising? In order for InnoDB to respond usefully to bug requests, it has to have reasonably direct access to the customers that report problems. That's just pretty obvious. Likewise, for them to be able to audit that MySQL AB is paying what they owe, they need *some* information on who is buying the licenses that they are selling. That may NOT be in terms of detailed customer information, but the number of licenses is a nice, discrete number that most certainly will have to be reported. -- (format nil "~S@~S" "cbbrowne" "cbbrowne.com") http://cbbrowne.com/info/lsf.html "C++ is more of a rube-goldberg type thing full of high-voltages, large chain-driven gears, sharp edges, exploding widgets, and spots to get your fingers crushed. And because of it's complexity many (if not most) of it's users don't know how it works, and can't tell ahead of time what's going to cause them to loose an arm." -- Grant Edwards