Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Is the shoe on the foot?

From: Chris Browne <cbbrowne(at)acm(dot)org>
To: pgsql-advocacy(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Is the shoe on the foot?
Date: 2008-04-18 16:10:28
Message-ID: 603apjqh3f.fsf@dba2.int.libertyrms.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-advocacy
bhurt(at)janestcapital(dot)com (Brian Hurt) writes:
> Richard Broersma wrote:
>
>>I used to kringe when PostgreSQL articles were posted on Slashdot.  It
>>seemed that so many liked to spread FUD about how slow PostgreSQL was.
>>
>>However it seems that MySQL is getting the FUD now and everyone seems
>>to have forgotten about the PostgreSQL FUD.
>>
>>http://developers.slashdot.org/article.pl?no_d2=1&sid=08/04/16/2337224
>>
> I'm not sure this qualifies as FUD.  I mean, generally FUD implies
> that the problems are illegitimate- the classic example was the IBM
> salesman warning customers to beware of being locked into an open
> solution.  This problem (the possibility/probability that Sun will
> close-source all or part of  MySQL) is a legitimate concern.  They're
> legally entitled to, and there is a financial argument in favor of
> them doing it (they need to better "leverage" their IP to help pay for
> the cost of buying the company).  Personally, I think it'll backfire,
> and destroy MySQL's popularity (especially considering there is a
> free, fast, *superior* solution out there for people to switch to).
> Five years ago, when MySQL still had a significant performance
> advantage, maybe it'd have worked, but not now.  But in any case, the
> possibility that Sun will do this is a real, legitimate concern, and
> thus not FUD, for MySQL users.

It seems to me that there are two main reasons for this NOT to happen:

 1.  Those applications that were expressly designed for elder
     versions of MySQL[tm] could continue to function atop the "legacy"
     code that won't become unavailable.

     Thus, if "Community OurSQL" (the _necessary_ renaming of it,
     since the community doesn't own the trademark) emerged, even in
     the most primitive, not-particularly-maintained form, this would
     largely *eliminate* Sun's ability to charge anything for services
     relating to it.  No benefit to Sun, for sure.

 2.  The *other* "branch" of things is the "modern, more functional"
     MySQL[tm], complete with stored functions, triggers, and such.

     Deploying atop this requires fairly substantial recoding of
     things, and, if Sun got overly "proprietary" about this, there
     would be little reason for would-be users NOT to consider
     widening their options to include PostgreSQL and Firebird.

In effect, if Sun gets over-exuberant about changing things, that will
make migrating to other options look attractive in comparison with
staying.
-- 
(format nil "~S(at)~S" "cbbrowne" "acm.org")
http://linuxfinances.info/info/linux.html
I'M SORRY, LUSER, I CAN'T LET YOU DO THAT.  WHY DON'T YOU LIE DOWN AND
TAKE A STRESS PILL?  MY NAME IS  LM1.  I WAS  MADE AT THE LISP MACHINE
FACTORY  IN MASSACHUSETTS ON  DECEMBER 12, 1992.   MY  TEACHER WAS MR.
WINSTON.  HE TAUGHT ME A PROGRAM.  WOULD YOU LIKE TO  SEE IT?  HERE IT
IS:

In response to

pgsql-advocacy by date

Next:From: Joshua D. DrakeDate: 2008-04-18 16:17:34
Subject: Re: Is the shoe on the foot?
Previous:From: Selena DeckelmannDate: 2008-04-18 15:55:23
Subject: Re: Is the shoe on the foot?

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group