A question about Oracle Contributor Agreement
Hi, I signed Oracle Contributor Agreement about a month ago, but have not got a response. I reported a bug, but I can not contribute my patch. So, could anyone please tell me how long will it take before I am informed? Thanks, sincerely
Oracle Certified Professional, MySQL 5.6 Database Administrator
Hi when will be the exam "Oracle Certified Professional, MySQL 5.6 Database Administrator" for MySQL 5.7? Lukas
Oracle Certified Professional, MySQL 5.6 Developer [1Z0-882]
Hi is the book Oracle Database 11g and MySQL 5.6 Developer Handbook from Michael McLaughlin a good preparation for new dev exam 1Z0-882? Will I pass when understand and know everything in this book? Lukas
Oracle Launches New MySQL 5.6 Certifications
Older MySQL Exams to Retire https://blogs.oracle.com/certification/entry/0875_01 regards, m -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/mysql
uncertain future of Oracle MySQL exams [1Z0-871, 1Z0-872, 1Z0-873, 1Z0-874]
Hi I am now responsible for LAMP applications. I worked previously with Oracle 11g. It seems that those exams are an easy win for me. I guess my preparation effort is about 60 hours. 1Z0-871 MySQL 5 Developer Certified Professional Exam, Part I 1Z0-872 MySQL 5 Developer Certified Professional Exam, Part II 1Z0-873 MySQL 5 Database Administrator Certified Professional Exam, Part I 1Z0-874 MySQL 5 Database Administrator Certified Professional Exam, Part II My concern is about the future of MySQL and the MySQL certifications. - it seems the exams didn't change since 2005 - Linux distributions ship MariaDB (not MySQL) - Oracle Press don't publish an official study guide - MySQL OCP exams are simpler than other OCP exams (for example Oracle 11g) what do you think?
Re: uncertain future of Oracle MySQL exams [1Z0-871, 1Z0-872, 1Z0-873, 1Z0-874]
Hello Lukas, On 7/22/2013 8:16 AM, Lukas Lehner wrote: Hi I am now responsible for LAMP applications. I worked previously with Oracle 11g. It seems that those exams are an easy win for me. I guess my preparation effort is about 60 hours. 1Z0-871 MySQL 5 Developer Certified Professional Exam, Part I 1Z0-872 MySQL 5 Developer Certified Professional Exam, Part II 1Z0-873 MySQL 5 Database Administrator Certified Professional Exam, Part I 1Z0-874 MySQL 5 Database Administrator Certified Professional Exam, Part II My concern is about the future of MySQL and the MySQL certifications. - it seems the exams didn't change since 2005 - Linux distributions ship MariaDB (not MySQL) - Oracle Press don't publish an official study guide - MySQL OCP exams are simpler than other OCP exams (for example Oracle 11g) what do you think? You are correct. However, after being acquired twice in rapid succession and after much internal MySQL reorganization due to each, a few resources are back in place to keep up with this stuff again. For some pretty solid legal reasons Oracle tries to avoid announcing much of anything before it is actually ready to be used. Stay tuned to the publicity channels for any official announcements if or when they are made. -- Shawn Green MySQL Principal Technical Support Engineer Oracle USA, Inc. - Hardware and Software, Engineered to Work Together. Office: Blountville, TN -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/mysql
MySQL Enterprise support now at Oracle?
Wow! We paid for MySQL enterprise plus enterprise support back in the good old days before ORACLE bought MySQL. I just sacrificed the sacred chicken and sprinkled the blood around my computer and went to sign up for support at support.oracle.com. After wading through the crappy Flash interface and telling them my dog's mother's maiden name and all, 3 hours later I got an email saying I was Approved. I feel better. I read a few of the numerous tutorials on HOW TO USE THEIR HELP THING and I still don't understand it. I did a search for MySQL on their site and got NOTHING. Have they dropped all support for MySQL? Is there somewhere else we should go to pay for one on one support for things like my little join query problem? Has anyone else had a good experience with Oracle's MySQL support? Maybe this is a bad dream and I'll wake up soon. Thanks, Jim McNeely -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/mysql?unsub=arch...@jab.org
Re: MySQL Enterprise support now at Oracle?
Shawn Green works for Oracle and has been very helpful, and I am happy to eat a little bit of shoe leather! Thanks Shawn! Jim On Mar 10, 2011, at 11:11 AM, Jim McNeely wrote: Wow! We paid for MySQL enterprise plus enterprise support back in the good old days before ORACLE bought MySQL. I just sacrificed the sacred chicken and sprinkled the blood around my computer and went to sign up for support at support.oracle.com. After wading through the crappy Flash interface and telling them my dog's mother's maiden name and all, 3 hours later I got an email saying I was Approved. I feel better. I read a few of the numerous tutorials on HOW TO USE THEIR HELP THING and I still don't understand it. I did a search for MySQL on their site and got NOTHING. Have they dropped all support for MySQL? Is there somewhere else we should go to pay for one on one support for things like my little join query problem? Has anyone else had a good experience with Oracle's MySQL support? Maybe this is a bad dream and I'll wake up soon. Thanks, Jim McNeely -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/mysql?unsub=j...@newcenturydata.com -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/mysql?unsub=arch...@jab.org
Re: MySQL Enterprise support now at Oracle?
On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 5:05 PM, Jim McNeely j...@newcenturydata.com wrote: Shawn Green works for Oracle and has been very helpful, and I am happy to eat a little bit of shoe leather! Thanks Shawn! Jim Check the archives for Shawn's posts. IMNSHO, they are unparalleled in clarity and depth and breadth of useful information. David
Migration from ORACLE to MySQL - CLOB
I need to migrate about a dozen tables from ORACLE 10g to MySQL 5. I have manually migrated the schema to MySQL. I am able to write SQL*PLUS queries to extract ORACLE data into insert statements (including date conversions to MySQL format etc) that I can run against the MySQL database. The CLOB fields are tripping me because of single quotes, double quotes and carriage returns in the data. I can possibly change all single quotes to two single quotes and double quotes to two double quotes and MySQL will be happy ingesting that data into TEXT fields. The carriage returns are breaking the lines when the SQL*PLUS data is spooled into a flat file. How can I deal with quotes and carriage returns in CLOB data? Thanks, Rajesh
Re: export db to oracle
Hi, Actually all the helpful tips that I have gotten have caused me to review the requirements! I now realise that that csv or xml files for the storage of an extract would be helpful, for testing and validation. a mysqldump might do that job too, but the output from mysqldump --compatible was rejected by oracle. -Syd - Original Message From: Kevin (Gmail) kfoneil...@gmail.com To: Johan De Meersman vegiv...@tuxera.be; Shawn Green (MySQL) shawn.l.gr...@oracle.com Cc: Sydney Puente sydneypue...@yahoo.com; mysql@lists.mysql.com Sent: Wed, 17 November, 2010 18:17:38 Subject: Re: export db to oracle Hello, It should be possible to connect Oracle to the MySQL (or other) database using a DBlink (using a MySQL ODBC driver) the tables could then be copied using PLSQL. Maybe you could link directly to Oracle and copy the code using MySQL procedures or scripts (I have more experienc of Oracle which works quite well as I described) This way, you can avoid use of external files and CSV etc. It is very likely quicker since you can use bulk loads or 'select into' routines once you have the right table structures and field type in place. This is a technique that I have used for ETL and data integration and it is very manageable. You can trap errors using cursors if the data has anomalies. Kevin O'Neill - Original Message - From: Johan De Meersman vegiv...@tuxera.be To: Shawn Green (MySQL) shawn.l.gr...@oracle.com Cc: Sydney Puente sydneypue...@yahoo.com; mysql@lists.mysql.com Sent: Wednesday, November 17, 2010 8:58 AM Subject: Re: export db to oracle On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 1:43 AM, Shawn Green (MySQL) shawn.l.gr...@oracle.com wrote: On 11/16/2010 15:14, Sydney Puente wrote: Hello, How can I export a mysql 5.0.45 db to Oracle? mysql is going to stau but I need to pass the data to oracle, just so the data can be transfered. I have carried out a mysql dump. This seems fine.create table etc. about 20 MB in total. Any ideas? It is on Redhat if that makes a difference. I suggest you also look at the syntax for SELECT INTO OUTFILE, too. Dumps are usually scripts of SQL statements that Oracle may not read appropriately. I'm not quite sure which formats Oracle reads in, although CSV is probably a good guess. if you disable mysqldump's extended insert syntax, however, I think the actual insert statements should be perfectly fine for most any database. You may need to tweak create statements for datatypes and syntax, though; it may be easier to just recreate the emtpy tables by hand. I think I also have vague memories of an option to use ANSI-SQL standard syntax, although that might just as well have been some third-party tool. And, speaking of third-party tools: tOra can (if well-compiled) be used to manage both MySQL and Oracle; maybe that nice tool can help you. -- Bier met grenadyn Is als mosterd by den wyn Sy die't drinkt, is eene kwezel Hy die't drinkt, is ras een ezel -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/mysql?unsub=arch...@jab.org
Re: export db to oracle
On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 2:54 PM, Sydney Puente sydneypue...@yahoo.com wrot a mysqldump might do that job too, but the output from mysqldump --compatible was rejected by oracle. Hmm. Interesting, you might want to file an issue about that - now that MySQL is oracle-owned, you'd expect at least that to work, wouldn't you :-p -- Bier met grenadyn Is als mosterd by den wyn Sy die't drinkt, is eene kwezel Hy die't drinkt, is ras een ezel
Re: export db to oracle
On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 1:43 AM, Shawn Green (MySQL) shawn.l.gr...@oracle.com wrote: On 11/16/2010 15:14, Sydney Puente wrote: Hello, How can I export a mysql 5.0.45 db to Oracle? mysql is going to stau but I need to pass the data to oracle, just so the data can be transfered. I have carried out a mysql dump. This seems fine.create table etc. about 20 MB in total. Any ideas? It is on Redhat if that makes a difference. I suggest you also look at the syntax for SELECT INTO OUTFILE, too. Dumps are usually scripts of SQL statements that Oracle may not read appropriately. I'm not quite sure which formats Oracle reads in, although CSV is probably a good guess. if you disable mysqldump's extended insert syntax, however, I think the actual insert statements should be perfectly fine for most any database. You may need to tweak create statements for datatypes and syntax, though; it may be easier to just recreate the emtpy tables by hand. I think I also have vague memories of an option to use ANSI-SQL standard syntax, although that might just as well have been some third-party tool. And, speaking of third-party tools: tOra can (if well-compiled) be used to manage both MySQL and Oracle; maybe that nice tool can help you. -- Bier met grenadyn Is als mosterd by den wyn Sy die't drinkt, is eene kwezel Hy die't drinkt, is ras een ezel
Re: export db to oracle
On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 2:26 PM, who.cat win@gmail.com wrote: Maybe you can dump as a csv format,then create table all tables in oracle .After that you can write a script program format the csv to oracle which can be recognized. MySQL's select into outfile may well be good enough to manage to output oracle-formatted inserts; and as I said standard (non-extended) insert syntax is probably good enough for oracle anyway. If you're going to be programming anyway, why not just write something that connects to both DBs and inserts into Oracle using prepared statements for speed ? -- Bier met grenadyn Is als mosterd by den wyn Sy die't drinkt, is eene kwezel Hy die't drinkt, is ras een ezel
Re: export db to oracle
Hello, It should be possible to connect Oracle to the MySQL (or other) database using a DBlink (using a MySQL ODBC driver) the tables could then be copied using PLSQL. Maybe you could link directly to Oracle and copy the code using MySQL procedures or scripts (I have more experienc of Oracle which works quite well as I described) This way, you can avoid use of external files and CSV etc. It is very likely quicker since you can use bulk loads or 'select into' routines once you have the right table structures and field type in place. This is a technique that I have used for ETL and data integration and it is very manageable. You can trap errors using cursors if the data has anomalies. Kevin O'Neill - Original Message - From: Johan De Meersman vegiv...@tuxera.be To: Shawn Green (MySQL) shawn.l.gr...@oracle.com Cc: Sydney Puente sydneypue...@yahoo.com; mysql@lists.mysql.com Sent: Wednesday, November 17, 2010 8:58 AM Subject: Re: export db to oracle On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 1:43 AM, Shawn Green (MySQL) shawn.l.gr...@oracle.com wrote: On 11/16/2010 15:14, Sydney Puente wrote: Hello, How can I export a mysql 5.0.45 db to Oracle? mysql is going to stau but I need to pass the data to oracle, just so the data can be transfered. I have carried out a mysql dump. This seems fine.create table etc. about 20 MB in total. Any ideas? It is on Redhat if that makes a difference. I suggest you also look at the syntax for SELECT INTO OUTFILE, too. Dumps are usually scripts of SQL statements that Oracle may not read appropriately. I'm not quite sure which formats Oracle reads in, although CSV is probably a good guess. if you disable mysqldump's extended insert syntax, however, I think the actual insert statements should be perfectly fine for most any database. You may need to tweak create statements for datatypes and syntax, though; it may be easier to just recreate the emtpy tables by hand. I think I also have vague memories of an option to use ANSI-SQL standard syntax, although that might just as well have been some third-party tool. And, speaking of third-party tools: tOra can (if well-compiled) be used to manage both MySQL and Oracle; maybe that nice tool can help you. -- Bier met grenadyn Is als mosterd by den wyn Sy die't drinkt, is eene kwezel Hy die't drinkt, is ras een ezel -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/mysql?unsub=arch...@jab.org
Re: export db to oracle
You can try using Oracle SQL Developer Tool which got the data import function from MySql. On 11/17/2010 4:14 AM, Sydney Puente wrote: Hello, How can I export a mysql 5.0.45 db to Oracle? mysql is going to stau but I need to pass the data to oracle, just so the data can be transfered. I have carried out a mysql dump. This seems fine.create table etc. about 20 MB in total. Any ideas? It is on Redhat if that makes a difference. TIA -Syd -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/mysql?unsub=arch...@jab.org
export db to oracle
Hello, How can I export a mysql 5.0.45 db to Oracle? mysql is going to stau but I need to pass the data to oracle, just so the data can be transfered. I have carried out a mysql dump. This seems fine.create table etc. about 20 MB in total. Any ideas? It is on Redhat if that makes a difference. TIA -Syd -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/mysql?unsub=arch...@jab.org
Re: export db to oracle
On 11/16/2010 15:14, Sydney Puente wrote: Hello, How can I export a mysql 5.0.45 db to Oracle? mysql is going to stau but I need to pass the data to oracle, just so the data can be transfered. I have carried out a mysql dump. This seems fine.create table etc. about 20 MB in total. Any ideas? It is on Redhat if that makes a difference. I suggest you also look at the syntax for SELECT INTO OUTFILE, too. Dumps are usually scripts of SQL statements that Oracle may not read appropriately. -- Shawn Green MySQL Principal Technical Support Engineer Oracle USA, Inc. Office: Blountville, TN -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/mysql?unsub=arch...@jab.org
Re: Oracle imports into MySQL
Hi Machiel, I'm not sure if you like the method I use for Export from Oracle to MySQL databases: You need an ODBC DSN for each, source and destination DB. Then you create an empty Access Database with a link to the Oracle Source table. If the destination MySQL table doesn't yet exists, you can export the linked oracle table directly into the existing ODBC-DSN of the MySQL DB. If (later on) the destination MySQL table exists, you can create an Add-Query that inserts selected rows from the Oracle table to the end of the MySQL table. These actions could be placed into macros (Access 'autoexec' for example) and in scheduled jobs of your operating system (I hope it's Windows, because you didn't say anything about that). If you don't like the Access built-in Visual Basic language, you can use any other programming language that has components to access to ODBC databases like Borland/Embarcadero C++Builder/Delphi or Microsoft Visual C++ etc. Hope this helps. Guido Machiel Richards machi...@rdc.co.za schrieb im Newsbeitrag news:1289457988.2320.27.ca...@machielr-laptop... Good day all I am hoping that someone has got some more answers for me on the topic as most of the websites which have not been very useful. All websites I have found thus far reffers to software that either needs to be bought or otherwise need to be run manually. One of our clients are currently running MySQL for their web based systems, however all other systems are running oracle. There is a current data load process from oracle that generates a dump file of specific data, goes through a convertion process, gets imported into a mysql runnign on VM to test import, then gets pushed to MySQL production. This process was put in place quite some time ago by developers. At some stage I read something about this process not being required from MySQL 5 onwards and data imports from oracle is less troublesome. The import process needs to run every 30 minutes and the current process is too troublesome. We are busy plannign a hardware migration for the systems and are also looking at improving these processes. Does anybody have experience with this to perhaps provide me with some info on how we can improve this import process? Any assistance will be appreciated. Regards Machiel -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/mysql?unsub=arch...@jab.org
Re: Oracle imports into MySQL
My quick suggestion for such a process would be to use SQL*NET formatting commands to create a well-formed CSV file, which you then import into MySQL using LOAD DATA INFILE. I'm not aware of any Oracle-specific import tools in MySQL. If anything, after the merger I would rather expect something that goes the other way round :-) On Thu, Nov 11, 2010 at 7:46 AM, Machiel Richards machi...@rdc.co.zawrote: Good day all I am hoping that someone has got some more answers for me on the topic as most of the websites which have not been very useful. All websites I have found thus far reffers to software that either needs to be bought or otherwise need to be run manually. One of our clients are currently running MySQL for their web based systems, however all other systems are running oracle. There is a current data load process from oracle that generates a dump file of specific data, goes through a convertion process, gets imported into a mysql runnign on VM to test import, then gets pushed to MySQL production. This process was put in place quite some time ago by developers. At some stage I read something about this process not being required from MySQL 5 onwards and data imports from oracle is less troublesome. The import process needs to run every 30 minutes and the current process is too troublesome. We are busy plannign a hardware migration for the systems and are also looking at improving these processes. Does anybody have experience with this to perhaps provide me with some info on how we can improve this import process? Any assistance will be appreciated. Regards Machiel -- Bier met grenadyn Is als mosterd by den wyn Sy die't drinkt, is eene kwezel Hy die't drinkt, is ras een ezel
Oracle imports into MySQL
Good day all I am hoping that someone has got some more answers for me on the topic as most of the websites which have not been very useful. All websites I have found thus far reffers to software that either needs to be bought or otherwise need to be run manually. One of our clients are currently running MySQL for their web based systems, however all other systems are running oracle. There is a current data load process from oracle that generates a dump file of specific data, goes through a convertion process, gets imported into a mysql runnign on VM to test import, then gets pushed to MySQL production. This process was put in place quite some time ago by developers. At some stage I read something about this process not being required from MySQL 5 onwards and data imports from oracle is less troublesome. The import process needs to run every 30 minutes and the current process is too troublesome. We are busy plannign a hardware migration for the systems and are also looking at improving these processes. Does anybody have experience with this to perhaps provide me with some info on how we can improve this import process? Any assistance will be appreciated. Regards Machiel
Re: Tokutek Acquires Oracle
Hi guys, Is the information is true. No, it was blocked by the EU. http://tokutek.com/2010/04/tokuteks-acquisitions-blocked-by-eu/ http://planet.mysql.com/ http://tokutek.com/2010/04/tokutek-acquires-oracle/ With regards, Martijn Tonies Upscene Productions http://www.upscene.com Download Database Workbench for Oracle, MS SQL Server, Sybase SQL Anywhere, MySQL, InterBase, NexusDB and Firebird! Database questions? Check the forum: http://www.databasedevelopmentforum.com -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/mysql?unsub=arch...@jab.org
Tokutek Acquires Oracle
Hi guys, Is the information is true. http://planet.mysql.com/ http://tokutek.com/2010/04/tokutek-acquires-oracle/ Regards, Krishna
Re: Tokutek Acquires Oracle
April's fools not a tradition where you are ? :-) On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 4:39 PM, Krishna Chandra Prajapati prajapat...@gmail.com wrote: Hi guys, Is the information is true. http://planet.mysql.com/ http://tokutek.com/2010/04/tokutek-acquires-oracle/ Regards, Krishna -- Bier met grenadyn Is als mosterd by den wyn Sy die't drinkt, is eene kwezel Hy die't drinkt, is ras een ezel
Re: Tokutek Acquires Oracle
Krishna Chandra Prajapati wrote: Hi guys, Is the information is true. http://planet.mysql.com/ http://tokutek.com/2010/04/tokutek-acquires-oracle/ Might want to check the date. Gary -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/mysql?unsub=arch...@jab.org
RE: Tokutek Acquires Oracle
Happy April Fool's Day. Regards, Jerry Schwartz The Infoshop by Global Information Incorporated 195 Farmington Ave. Farmington, CT 06032 860.674.8796 / FAX: 860.674.8341 www.the-infoshop.com -Original Message- From: Krishna Chandra Prajapati [mailto:prajapat...@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, April 01, 2010 10:39 AM To: MySQL Subject: Tokutek Acquires Oracle Hi guys, Is the information is true. http://planet.mysql.com/ http://tokutek.com/2010/04/tokutek-acquires-oracle/ Regards, Krishna -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/mysql?unsub=arch...@jab.org
RE: Tokutek Acquires Oracle
short of exxon there is no other entity that comes close to acquiring Oracle Martin Gainty __ Verzicht und Vertraulichkeitanmerkung/Note de déni et de confidentialité Diese Nachricht ist vertraulich. Sollten Sie nicht der vorgesehene Empfaenger sein, so bitten wir hoeflich um eine Mitteilung. Jede unbefugte Weiterleitung oder Fertigung einer Kopie ist unzulaessig. Diese Nachricht dient lediglich dem Austausch von Informationen und entfaltet keine rechtliche Bindungswirkung. Aufgrund der leichten Manipulierbarkeit von E-Mails koennen wir keine Haftung fuer den Inhalt uebernehmen. Ce message est confidentiel et peut être privilégié. Si vous n'êtes pas le destinataire prévu, nous te demandons avec bonté que pour satisfaire informez l'expéditeur. N'importe quelle diffusion non autorisée ou la copie de ceci est interdite. Ce message sert à l'information seulement et n'aura pas n'importe quel effet légalement obligatoire. Étant donné que les email peuvent facilement être sujets à la manipulation, nous ne pouvons accepter aucune responsabilité pour le contenu fourni. From: jschwa...@the-infoshop.com To: prajapat...@gmail.com; mysql@lists.mysql.com Subject: RE: Tokutek Acquires Oracle Date: Thu, 1 Apr 2010 14:28:31 -0400 Happy April Fool's Day. Regards, Jerry Schwartz The Infoshop by Global Information Incorporated 195 Farmington Ave. Farmington, CT 06032 860.674.8796 / FAX: 860.674.8341 www.the-infoshop.com -Original Message- From: Krishna Chandra Prajapati [mailto:prajapat...@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, April 01, 2010 10:39 AM To: MySQL Subject: Tokutek Acquires Oracle Hi guys, Is the information is true. http://planet.mysql.com/ http://tokutek.com/2010/04/tokutek-acquires-oracle/ Regards, Krishna -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql?unsub=mgai...@hotmail.com _ Hotmail has tools for the New Busy. Search, chat and e-mail from your inbox. http://www.windowslive.com/campaign/thenewbusy?ocid=PID27925::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-US:WM_HMP:032010_1
Re: 50 things to know before migrating from Oracle to MySQL
Martijn Tonies wrote: database. I would also bet that 80% of the people who are actually writing queries with that many joins don't have a solid grasp of the fundamental principles of relational database design. Why not? Normalizing gets you -more- tables, not less. And normalizing is a goal in itself? I've seen plenty of normalized databases which have become a big mess because of the unnecessarily complex queries you needed to do a relatively simple job. No, it's not a goal in itself, that's not what I said. A lot of the enterprise level features can be useful in certain cases, Normalizing data has nothing to do with enterprise level, it's a matter if keeping your data consistent, being able to create proper constraints at the database, for example. but it seems that a lot of times they are just used simply to use them. I cannot find justification for making databases unnecessarily complex, using subqueries when a simple join is all you need, using views, functions, stored procedures in cases that don't require such features, etc. I agree that a lot of people requiring more powerful hard- and software for their application are simply forgetting that they were supposed to produce a working application and not the most normalized database with all the fancy views and other stuff. With regards, Martijn Tonies Upscene Productions http://www.upscene.com Download Database Workbench for Oracle, MS SQL Server, Sybase SQL Anywhere, MySQL, InterBase, NexusDB and Firebird! Database questions? Check the forum: http://www.databasedevelopmentforum.com -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/mysql?unsub=arch...@jab.org
Re: 50 things to know before migrating from Oracle to MySQL
Tom, I noticed the article didn't say how much money you'll save by not paying through the nose for Oracle per server licensing, the cost of upgrading your hardware to get some speed out of Oracle, or the cost of having to hire one or more Oracle administrators to manage and tweak the database. how much does an oracle programmer who can maintain your queries with more than 61 joins cost, in, say, usd/hr? Views :-) With regards, Martijn Tonies Upscene Productions http://www.upscene.com Download Database Workbench for Oracle, MS SQL Server, Sybase SQL Anywhere, MySQL, InterBase, NexusDB and Firebird! Database questions? Check the forum: http://www.databasedevelopmentforum.com -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/mysql?unsub=arch...@jab.org
Re: 50 things to know before migrating from Oracle to MySQL
Martijn Tonies wrote: Martijn Tonies wrote: database. I would also bet that 80% of the people who are actually writing queries with that many joins don't have a solid grasp of the fundamental principles of relational database design. Why not? Normalizing gets you -more- tables, not less. And normalizing is a goal in itself? I've seen plenty of normalized databases which have become a big mess because of the unnecessarily complex queries you needed to do a relatively simple job. No, it's not a goal in itself, that's not what I said. I didn't say that you said that. You stated that Normalizing gets you -more- tables. It wasn't mentioned why you wanted to normalize the database in the first place. To me your statement looked like it said that normalizing a database would be a requirement for any database. This automatically would produce queries with 61+ joins in them. A lot of the enterprise level features can be useful in certain cases, Normalizing data has nothing to do with enterprise level, it's a matter if keeping your data consistent, being able to create proper constraints at the database, for example. Normalizing has nothing to do with enterprise level, but joining complex views has. Don't ask yourself why you've created the views, just use them in a join. So normalize each database because you may want to create constraints in some situations? This is the behaviour which causes unnecessarily complex databases, queries and applications. If you ask yourself if normalizing a column in a table is useful and if you really need the constraint and if the view, stored procedure, function or whatever you use is really useful, chances are that the application is a lot simpler, faster and easier to maintain. -- Jigal van Hemert. -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/mysql?unsub=arch...@jab.org
Re: 50 things to know before migrating from Oracle to MySQL
database. I would also bet that 80% of the people who are actually writing queries with that many joins don't have a solid grasp of the fundamental principles of relational database design. Why not? Normalizing gets you -more- tables, not less. And normalizing is a goal in itself? I've seen plenty of normalized databases which have become a big mess because of the unnecessarily complex queries you needed to do a relatively simple job. No, it's not a goal in itself, that's not what I said. I didn't say that you said that. You stated that Normalizing gets you -more- tables. It wasn't mentioned why you wanted to normalize the database in the first place. To me your statement looked like it said that normalizing a database would be a requirement for any database. Yes, that's a good thing, unless it's an OLAP database. It improves data consistency and avoids NULLs in storage, which is good. This automatically would produce queries with 61+ joins in them. A lot of the enterprise level features can be useful in certain cases, Normalizing data has nothing to do with enterprise level, it's a matter if keeping your data consistent, being able to create proper constraints at the database, for example. Normalizing has nothing to do with enterprise level, but joining complex views has. Don't ask yourself why you've created the views, just use them in a join. So normalize each database because you may want to create constraints in some situations? Constraints are a good thing. This is the behaviour which causes unnecessarily complex databases, queries and applications. Unless you don't value your data very much, I consider normalizing, database constraints etc a pro, not a con. If you ask yourself if normalizing a column in a table is useful and if you really need the constraint and if the view, stored procedure, function or whatever you use is really useful, chances are that the application is a lot simpler, faster and easier to maintain. With regards, Martijn Tonies Upscene Productions http://www.upscene.com Download Database Workbench for Oracle, MS SQL Server, Sybase SQL Anywhere, MySQL, InterBase, NexusDB and Firebird! Database questions? Check the forum: http://www.databasedevelopmentforum.com -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/mysql?unsub=arch...@jab.org
Re: 50 things to know before migrating from Oracle to MySQL
Oracle will sell it if they can convince the customer. Any one who has had the pleasure of using Oracle Application Server can attest to that. -- - michael dykman - mdyk...@gmail.com May the Source be with you. -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/mysql?unsub=arch...@jab.org
Re: 50 things to know before migrating from Oracle to MySQL
On 01/29/2010 07:24 PM, Shawn Green wrote: Rudy Lippan wrote: On 01/29/2010 02:57 PM, Chris W wrote: Hardcore stupid if you ask me. I suppose it is possible to have a valid reason (can't imagine what it might be) for using more than 61 How about complex data requirements? Depending on the resolution of your data set, I could see a simple person-type object that contained name, address, SSN, mother, and birth_info starting to approach the limit. In a simplified Object-to-Database map, most object types (classes) equate to a single table. Each table will contain several columns. Each column will represent one particular property of the object. For objects that contains lists of sub-values or sub-objects, you use another table (usually called a child) related to the first (often called a parent). You are speaking to a simplified mapping; whereas, I was suggesting one valid reason for needing many tables in a join, viz., you have a requirement for *high resolution* data set. Maybe think of a genealogy-type database where someone might have a good reason inquire whether 2 people lived within 5 miles of each other between July 23, 1843 and September 18, 1858. Simple right? One little query. But now, let us add that the city was renamed 4 times, lost in a war to another country, recaptured, annexed by another city which was eventually dissolved for lack of tax revenue. Or to get a few more tables in the mix: Could those people have lived on the same street, same block, within 15 houses? And let us not forget that the street has been renamed many times, renumbered a few (using different numbering schemes), some properties were subdivided, and two adjoining properties were held, at one point, in single and separate ownership but ended up being purchased by the same person during a time when the zoning laws forced a merger. Sure it is overkill for your shopping cart, but not for my database of all worldly knowledge :) It is just a matter of how you look it. BTA, if you were writing your shopping cart for a genealogy website that had the above database, you might just create a view, city(city_id, current_name), and use that id when storing user/credit card info. OK, after this last statement I will cut you some serious slack. However, and I hope you agree, unless someone is using some rather obscene normalization, most queries should not require joins of more than 10 or 12 tables to resolve. Or using multiple imported data sets that are each normalized, or using a code generator, or, or ,or. In general, I agree, but only in general. My personal thumbrule is that if I have more than about 7-9 tables in a single query, I should probably attack the problem in stages. I do this because the physical act of logically (internally) representing all of those columns across all of those row permutations in memory can become a burden to process. Here you are talking about working around limitations: Either yours or the database's. -r -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/mysql?unsub=arch...@jab.org
Re: 50 things to know before migrating from Oracle to MySQL
On 1/29/10 5:03 PM, mos mo...@fastmail.fm wrote: I noticed the article didn't say how much money you'll save by not paying through the nose for Oracle per server licensing, the cost of upgrading your hardware to get some speed out of Oracle, or the cost of having to hire one or more Oracle administrators to manage and tweak the database. how much does an oracle programmer who can maintain your queries with more than 61 joins cost, in, say, usd/hr? -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/mysql?unsub=arch...@jab.org
Re: 50 things to know before migrating from Oracle to MySQL
I once was selling a system to an organization. I recommended an IBM AIX box for about $30,000. A competitor was charging $30,000 for the software and said it had to run on an AS/400 that would cost in excess of $200,000. I lost the sale because the IBM salesman said, quite candidly, 'I make more commission on the AS/400 so that's the one I am selling.' Oracle is very similar. They are managed to make money. I suspect we will see licensing fees and required support contracts because they can now charge them. And, an Oracle consultant to write a join with 100-200 joins? Oracle will sell it if they can convince the customer. Just some thoughts. - Original Message - From: Tom Worster f...@thefsb.org To: mos mo...@fastmail.fm; mysql@lists.mysql.com Sent: Sunday, January 31, 2010 7:39 PM Subject: Re: 50 things to know before migrating from Oracle to MySQL On 1/29/10 5:03 PM, mos mo...@fastmail.fm wrote: I noticed the article didn't say how much money you'll save by not paying through the nose for Oracle per server licensing, the cost of upgrading your hardware to get some speed out of Oracle, or the cost of having to hire one or more Oracle administrators to manage and tweak the database. how much does an oracle programmer who can maintain your queries with more than 61 joins cost, in, say, usd/hr? -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/mysql?unsub=c...@etrak-plus.com -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/mysql?unsub=arch...@jab.org
Re: 50 things to know before migrating from Oracle to MySQL
Martijn Tonies wrote: database. I would also bet that 80% of the people who are actually writing queries with that many joins don't have a solid grasp of the fundamental principles of relational database design. Why not? Normalizing gets you -more- tables, not less. And normalizing is a goal in itself? I've seen plenty of normalized databases which have become a big mess because of the unnecessarily complex queries you needed to do a relatively simple job. A lot of the enterprise level features can be useful in certain cases, but it seems that a lot of times they are just used simply to use them. I cannot find justification for making databases unnecessarily complex, using subqueries when a simple join is all you need, using views, functions, stored procedures in cases that don't require such features, etc. I agree that a lot of people requiring more powerful hard- and software for their application are simply forgetting that they were supposed to produce a working application and not the most normalized database with all the fancy views and other stuff. -- Jigal van Hemert. -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/mysql?unsub=arch...@jab.org
Re: 50 things to know before migrating from Oracle to MySQL
Rudy Lippan wrote: How about complex data requirements? Depending on the resolution of your data set, I could see a simple person-type object that contained name, address, SSN, mother, and birth_info starting to approach the limit. Cities change, address changes, names change, and even mothers can change. The simple-looking street part of an address can have (at least) number, direction, name, suffix, any of which can change. Okay, so you want to link a person to an address table. I can justify that in the case of multiple addresses with a single person. But then you build a 'city' table to normalize that. Or no, better make a zip code table, link that to the 'city' table. Wait, streets can change names; a 'street' table too to link. Oh no! sometimes streets are split. So an address is a 'property' (a piece of ground), linked to a street, street linked to zip code, zip code linked to city. Damn (sorry), a 'property' can be divided... Oh my... Ever thought about updating a table by renaming a street? Or by selecting a group of street-number combinations and rename them? The real art is trying to balance the need of simplicity and ease of understanding with the need for flexibility, and that has nothing to do with relational theory. In real life the balance tends to go to unnecessary flexibility resulting in systems which are simply too heavy for the actual needs. Complex datasets are, by their nature, complex, and can only be simplified so much. You try to hide the complexity, you shift it, you move-it, you send it to its room, you pretend it is not there. And yet it still pops up at the most inopportune times and has to be dealt with. And still, in a lot of cases the complex datasets are even made more complex by normalization, trying to be ultimately flexible and creating a solution for problems which simply don't exist. In almost all cases a simple solution will be the best. Regards, Jigal van Hemert. -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/mysql?unsub=arch...@jab.org
Re: 50 things to know before migrating from Oracle to MySQL
On 1/28/10 5:21 AM, changuno chang...@rediffmail.com wrote: Hi folks, Read a blog which states 50 things to know before migrating from Oracle to MySQL. Any comments on this? as a relatively unsophisticated dbms user (just dynamic web site back end), i thought it was very interesting to see the kinds of things oracle users do that i'd never have imagined. more than 61 joins in a query?! man, those guys are hardcore. -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/mysql?unsub=arch...@jab.org
Re: 50 things to know before migrating from Oracle to MySQL
Hmmm... I find it suspicious that there are *exactly* 50 things you need to know before migrating from oracle to mysql. Not 49. Not 51. Exactly 50. Well, he did repeat that clustering is not what you think it is so I guess it technically is 49. But I wonder what would happen if he thunk up a 51st thing or if somebody emailed him one more thing. - Original Message - From: Carl c...@etrak-plus.com To: mysql@lists.mysql.com Sent: Thursday, January 28, 2010 4:56 PM Subject: Re: 50 things to know before migrating from Oracle to MySQL A quick Google turned up http://www.xaprb.com/blog/2009/03/13/50-things-to-know-before-migrating-oracle-to-mysql/ Man, I love Google. Thanks, Carl - Original Message - From: Daevid Vincent dae...@daevid.com To: mysql@lists.mysql.com Cc: 'changuno ' chang...@rediffmail.com Sent: Thursday, January 28, 2010 5:49 PM Subject: RE: 50 things to know before migrating from Oracle to MySQL -Original Message- From: John Meyer [mailto:johnme...@pueblocomputing.com] Sent: Thursday, January 28, 2010 2:16 PM To: mysql@lists.mysql.com On 1/28/2010 3:21 AM, changuno wrote: Read a blog which states 50 things to know before migrating from Oracle to MySQL. Any comments on this? would it have been too much to just link to it? Thought the same thing. Not only that, it would have been PREFERRED, so I can BOOKMARK it and SHARE it with my other colleagues. -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/mysql?unsub=c...@etrak-plus.com -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/mysql?unsub=jh...@math.wisc.edu -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/mysql?unsub=arch...@jab.org
Re: 50 things to know before migrating from Oracle to MySQL
25. Each table can have a different storage backend (”storage engine”). Yes, we absolutely allow this. Each engine brings a certain strength to the storage and retrieval solutions you can create with MySQL. We explicitly recognize that there is no one size fits all approach that meets the needs of every problem. This also allows for special-purpose solutions to be integrated into MySQL: http://solutions.mysql.com/solutions/?type=29 Actually, this is one thing that annoys me too, or actually, that not everything is supported in every storage engine. You get, for example, full text indices, but no transactions. And so on. 38. The number of joins per query is limited to 61. True, but why is this a problem? Do you frequently (or ever) need to join more than 61 tables into the same query? If you do, I propose that you need to revisit your schema design choices or review how you write your queries. In this case, I think we are discouraging bad practices. Bad practices? So, if you have too many joins, your schema design is wrong? This is just silly... if your data is split over different tables it's usually because it's normalized, and especially for more complex applications this is a pro, not a con. 49. There are no sequences. Please explain why auto_increment cannot meet this same need? Why have the overhead of two ways of performing essentially the same function? This is just one less way to confuse your design. Sequences are way easier to use in multi-table inserts. With regards, Martijn Tonies Upscene Productions http://www.upscene.com Download Database Workbench for Oracle, MS SQL Server, Sybase SQL Anywhere, MySQL, InterBase, NexusDB and Firebird! Database questions? Check the forum: http://www.databasedevelopmentforum.com -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/mysql?unsub=arch...@jab.org
Re: 50 things to know before migrating from Oracle to MySQL
fsb wrote: as a relatively unsophisticated dbms user (just dynamic web site back end), i thought it was very interesting to see the kinds of things oracle users do that i'd never have imagined. more than 61 joins in a query?! man, those guys are hardcore. Hardcore stupid if you ask me. I suppose it is possible to have a valid reason (can't imagine what it might be) for using more than 61 joins. But I would be willing to bet that 99.99% of the time if you get even close to that many joins you have a very poorly designed database. I would also bet that 80% of the people who are actually writing queries with that many joins don't have a solid grasp of the fundamental principles of relational database design. Chris W -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/mysql?unsub=arch...@jab.org
Re: 50 things to know before migrating from Oracle to MySQL
At 01:57 PM 1/29/2010, Chris W wrote: fsb wrote: as a relatively unsophisticated dbms user (just dynamic web site back end), i thought it was very interesting to see the kinds of things oracle users do that i'd never have imagined. more than 61 joins in a query?! man, those guys are hardcore. Hardcore stupid if you ask me. I suppose it is possible to have a valid reason (can't imagine what it might be) for using more than 61 joins. But I would be willing to bet that 99.99% of the time if you get even close to that many joins you have a very poorly designed database. I would also bet that 80% of the people who are actually writing queries with that many joins don't have a solid grasp of the fundamental principles of relational database design. Chris W I noticed the article didn't say how much money you'll save by not paying through the nose for Oracle per server licensing, the cost of upgrading your hardware to get some speed out of Oracle, or the cost of having to hire one or more Oracle administrators to manage and tweak the database. I guess they forgot to mention that. :-) Mike -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/mysql?unsub=arch...@jab.org
Re: 50 things to know before migrating from Oracle to MySQL
as a relatively unsophisticated dbms user (just dynamic web site back end), i thought it was very interesting to see the kinds of things oracle users do that i'd never have imagined. more than 61 joins in a query?! man, those guys are hardcore. Hardcore stupid if you ask me. I suppose it is possible to have a valid reason (can't imagine what it might be) for using more than 61 joins. But I would be willing to bet that 99.99% of the time if you get even close to that many joins you have a very poorly designed database. I would also bet that 80% of the people who are actually writing queries with that many joins don't have a solid grasp of the fundamental principles of relational database design. Why not? Normalizing gets you -more- tables, not less. That being said, try joining several complex views and you'll get more joins... With regards, Martijn Tonies Upscene Productions http://www.upscene.com Download Database Workbench for Oracle, MS SQL Server, Sybase SQL Anywhere, MySQL, InterBase, NexusDB and Firebird! Database questions? Check the forum: http://www.databasedevelopmentforum.com -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/mysql?unsub=arch...@jab.org
Re: 50 things to know before migrating from Oracle to MySQL
... or 50 ways to leave your Oracle... ... or 50 ways to save your money... Choose mysql! :) -- Jørn Dahl-Stamnes homepage: http://www.dahl-stamnes.net/dahls/ -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/mysql?unsub=arch...@jab.org
Re: 50 things to know before migrating from Oracle to MySQL
On 01/29/2010 02:57 PM, Chris W wrote: Hardcore stupid if you ask me. I suppose it is possible to have a valid reason (can't imagine what it might be) for using more than 61 How about complex data requirements? Depending on the resolution of your data set, I could see a simple person-type object that contained name, address, SSN, mother, and birth_info starting to approach the limit. Cities change, address changes, names change, and even mothers can change. The simple-looking street part of an address can have (at least) number, direction, name, suffix, any of which can change. joins. But I would be willing to bet that 99.99% of the time if you get even close to that many joins you have a very poorly designed database. I would also bet that 80% of the people who are actually writing queries with that many joins don't have a solid grasp of the fundamental principles of relational database design. I suspect otherwise. In my experience, most of the time when someone does not understand relational databases, there is a tendency towards fewer tables; and, in the few cases where I have seen too many tables, the joins were more likely to be done in the application code than in the database... Fun Times there The real art is trying to balance the need of simplicity and ease of understanding with the need for flexibility, and that has nothing to do with relational theory. Complex datasets are, by their nature, complex, and can only be simplified so much. You try to hide the complexity, you shift it, you move-it, you send it to its room, you pretend it is not there. And yet it still pops up at the most inopportune times and has to be dealt with. -r -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/mysql?unsub=arch...@jab.org
Re: 50 things to know before migrating from Oracle to MySQL
Rudy Lippan wrote: On 01/29/2010 02:57 PM, Chris W wrote: Hardcore stupid if you ask me. I suppose it is possible to have a valid reason (can't imagine what it might be) for using more than 61 How about complex data requirements? Depending on the resolution of your data set, I could see a simple person-type object that contained name, address, SSN, mother, and birth_info starting to approach the limit. You described one table with 5 columns. Cities change, address changes, names change, and even mothers can change. All of these would be tracked in different rows, not different tables. The simple-looking street part of an address can have (at least) number, direction, name, suffix, any of which can change. That's one more table for addresses. So far you are up to two whole tables. In a simplified Object-to-Database map, most object types (classes) equate to a single table. Each table will contain several columns. Each column will represent one particular property of the object. For objects that contains lists of sub-values or sub-objects, you use another table (usually called a child) related to the first (often called a parent). joins. But I would be willing to bet that 99.99% of the time if you get even close to that many joins you have a very poorly designed database. I would also bet that 80% of the people who are actually writing queries with that many joins don't have a solid grasp of the fundamental principles of relational database design. I suspect otherwise. In my experience, most of the time when someone does not understand relational databases, there is a tendency towards fewer tables; and, in the few cases where I have seen too many tables, the joins were more likely to be done in the application code than in the database... Fun Times there The real art is trying to balance the need of simplicity and ease of understanding with the need for flexibility, and that has nothing to do with relational theory. Complex datasets are, by their nature, complex, and can only be simplified so much. You try to hide the complexity, you shift it, you move-it, you send it to its room, you pretend it is not there. And yet it still pops up at the most inopportune times and has to be dealt with. OK, after this last statement I will cut you some serious slack. However, and I hope you agree, unless someone is using some rather obscene normalization, most queries should not require joins of more than 10 or 12 tables to resolve. My personal thumbrule is that if I have more than about 7-9 tables in a single query, I should probably attack the problem in stages. I do this because the physical act of logically (internally) representing all of those columns across all of those row permutations in memory can become a burden to process. -- Shawn Green, MySQL Senior Support Engineer Sun Microsystems, Inc. Office: Blountville, TN -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/mysql?unsub=arch...@jab.org
50 things to know before migrating from Oracle to MySQL
Hi folks, Read a blog which states 50 things to know before migrating from Oracle to MySQL. Any comments on this? nbsp;nbsp; 1. Subqueries are poorly optimized. nbsp;nbsp; 2. Complex queries are a weak point. nbsp;nbsp; 3. The query executioner (aka query optimizer / planner) is less sophisticated. nbsp;nbsp; 4. Performance tuning and metrics capabilities are limited. nbsp;nbsp; 5. There is limited ability to audit. nbsp;nbsp; 6. Security is unsophisticated, even crude. There are no groups or roles, no ability to deny a privilege (you can only grant nbsp;nbsp;nbsp; nbsp;nbsp;nbsp; privileges). A user who logs in with the same username and password from different network addresses may be treated as a completely separate user. There is no built-in encryption comparable to Oracle. nbsp;nbsp; 7. Authentication is built-in. There is no LDAP, Active Directory, or other external authentication capability. nbsp;nbsp; 8. Clustering is not what you think it is. nbsp;nbsp; 9. Stored procedures and triggers are limited. nbsp; 10. Vertical scalability is poor. nbsp; 11. There is zero MPP support. nbsp; 12. SMP is supported, but MySQL doesn’t scale well to more than 4 or 8 cores/CPUs. nbsp; 13. There is no fractional-second storage type for times, dates, or intervals. nbsp; 14. The language used to write stored procedures, triggers, scheduled events, and stored functions is very limited. nbsp; 15. There is no roll-back recovery. There is only roll-forward recovery. nbsp; 16. There is no support for snapshots. nbsp; 17. There is no support for database links. There is something called the Federated storage engine that acts as a relay by passing queries along to a table on a remote server, but it is crude and buggy. nbsp; 18. Data integrity checking is very weak, and even basic integrity constraints cannot always be enforced. nbsp; 19. There are very few optimizer hints to tune query execution plans. nbsp; 20. There is only one type of join plan: nested-loop. There are no sort-merge joins or hash joins. nbsp; 21. Most queries can use only a single index per table; some multi-index query plans exist in certain cases, but the cost is usually underestimated by the query optimizer, and they are often slower than a table scan. nbsp; 22. There are no bitmap indexes. Each storage engine supports different types of indexes. Most engines support B-Tree indexes. nbsp; 23. There are fewer and less sophisticated tools for administration. nbsp; 24. There is no IDE and debugger that approaches the level of sophistication you may be accustomed to. You’ll probably be writing your stored procedures in a text editor and debugging them by adding statements that insert rows into a table called debug_log. nbsp; 25. Each table can have a different storage backend (”storage engine”). nbsp; 26. Each storage engine can have widely varying behavior, features, and properties. nbsp; 27. Foreign keys are not supported in most storage engines. nbsp; 28. The default storage engine is non-transactional and corrupts easily. nbsp; 29. Oracle owns InnoDB, the most advanced and popular storage engine. nbsp; 30. Certain types of execution plans are only supported in some storage engines. Certain types of COUNT() queries execute instantly in some storage engines and slowly in others. nbsp; 31. Execution plans are not cached globally, only per-connection. nbsp; 32. Full-text search is limited and only available for non-transactional storage backends. Ditto for GIS/spatial types and queries. nbsp; 33. There are no resource controls. A completely unprivileged user can effortlessly run the server out of memory and crash it, or use up all CPU resources. nbsp; 34. There are no integrated or add-on business intelligence, OLAP cube, etc packages. nbsp; 35. There is nothing analogous to Grid Control. nbsp; 36. There is nothing even remotely like RAC. If you are asking “How do I build RAC with MySQL,” you are asking the wrong question. nbsp; 37. There are no user-defined types or domains. nbsp; 38. The number of joins per query is limited to 61. nbsp; 39. MySQL supports a smaller subset of SQL syntax. There are no recursive queries, common table expressions, or windowing functions. There are a few extensions to SQL that are somewhat analogous to MERGE and similar features, but are very simplistic in comparison. nbsp; 40. There are no functional columns (e.g. a column whose value is calculated as an expression). nbsp; 41. You cannot create an index on an expression, you can only index columns. nbsp; 42. There are no materialized views. nbsp; 43. The statistics vary between storage engines and regardless of the storage engine, are limited to simple cardinality and rows-in-a-range. In other words, statistics on data distribution are limited. There is not much control over updating of statistics. nbsp; 44. There is no built-in promotion or failover mechanism. nbsp; 45. Replication is asynchronous and has many limitations and edge
Re: 50 things to know before migrating from Oracle to MySQL
Yes: YMMV. Caveat emptor. Don't switch to a product you don't know. If you need nothing that MySQL doesn't offer, it may be a good fit for you. If you need features that it doesn't offer, it may not be a good fit for you. News at eleven. On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 11:21 AM, changuno chang...@rediffmail.com wrote: Hi folks, Read a blog which states 50 things to know before migrating from Oracle to MySQL. Any comments on this? nbsp;nbsp; 1. Subqueries are poorly optimized. nbsp;nbsp; 2. Complex queries are a weak point. nbsp;nbsp; 3. The query executioner (aka query optimizer / planner) is less sophisticated. nbsp;nbsp; 4. Performance tuning and metrics capabilities are limited. nbsp;nbsp; 5. There is limited ability to audit. nbsp;nbsp; 6. Security is unsophisticated, even crude. There are no groups or roles, no ability to deny a privilege (you can only grant nbsp;nbsp;nbsp; nbsp;nbsp;nbsp; privileges). A user who logs in with the same username and password from different network addresses may be treated as a completely separate user. There is no built-in encryption comparable to Oracle. nbsp;nbsp; 7. Authentication is built-in. There is no LDAP, Active Directory, or other external authentication capability. nbsp;nbsp; 8. Clustering is not what you think it is. nbsp;nbsp; 9. Stored procedures and triggers are limited. nbsp; 10. Vertical scalability is poor. nbsp; 11. There is zero MPP support. nbsp; 12. SMP is supported, but MySQL doesn’t scale well to more than 4 or 8 cores/CPUs. nbsp; 13. There is no fractional-second storage type for times, dates, or intervals. nbsp; 14. The language used to write stored procedures, triggers, scheduled events, and stored functions is very limited. nbsp; 15. There is no roll-back recovery. There is only roll-forward recovery. nbsp; 16. There is no support for snapshots. nbsp; 17. There is no support for database links. There is something called the Federated storage engine that acts as a relay by passing queries along to a table on a remote server, but it is crude and buggy. nbsp; 18. Data integrity checking is very weak, and even basic integrity constraints cannot always be enforced. nbsp; 19. There are very few optimizer hints to tune query execution plans. nbsp; 20. There is only one type of join plan: nested-loop. There are no sort-merge joins or hash joins. nbsp; 21. Most queries can use only a single index per table; some multi-index query plans exist in certain cases, but the cost is usually underestimated by the query optimizer, and they are often slower than a table scan. nbsp; 22. There are no bitmap indexes. Each storage engine supports different types of indexes. Most engines support B-Tree indexes. nbsp; 23. There are fewer and less sophisticated tools for administration. nbsp; 24. There is no IDE and debugger that approaches the level of sophistication you may be accustomed to. You’ll probably be writing your stored procedures in a text editor and debugging them by adding statements that insert rows into a table called debug_log. nbsp; 25. Each table can have a different storage backend (”storage engine”). nbsp; 26. Each storage engine can have widely varying behavior, features, and properties. nbsp; 27. Foreign keys are not supported in most storage engines. nbsp; 28. The default storage engine is non-transactional and corrupts easily. nbsp; 29. Oracle owns InnoDB, the most advanced and popular storage engine. nbsp; 30. Certain types of execution plans are only supported in some storage engines. Certain types of COUNT() queries execute instantly in some storage engines and slowly in others. nbsp; 31. Execution plans are not cached globally, only per-connection. nbsp; 32. Full-text search is limited and only available for non-transactional storage backends. Ditto for GIS/spatial types and queries. nbsp; 33. There are no resource controls. A completely unprivileged user can effortlessly run the server out of memory and crash it, or use up all CPU resources. nbsp; 34. There are no integrated or add-on business intelligence, OLAP cube, etc packages. nbsp; 35. There is nothing analogous to Grid Control. nbsp; 36. There is nothing even remotely like RAC. If you are asking “How do I build RAC with MySQL,” you are asking the wrong question. nbsp; 37. There are no user-defined types or domains. nbsp; 38. The number of joins per query is limited to 61. nbsp; 39. MySQL supports a smaller subset of SQL syntax. There are no recursive queries, common table expressions, or windowing functions. There are a few extensions to SQL that are somewhat analogous to MERGE and similar features, but are very simplistic in comparison. nbsp; 40. There are no functional columns (e.g. a column whose value is calculated as an expression). nbsp; 41. You cannot create an index on an expression, you can only index columns. nbsp; 42. There are no materialized views. nbsp; 43. The statistics vary between
Re: 50 things to know before migrating from Oracle to MySQL
changuno wrote: Hi folks, Read a blog which states 50 things to know before migrating from Oracle to MySQL. Any comments on this? ... list snipped ... MySQL was never designed to be a clone of Oracle (the database). We have distinct differences in design and implementation that make us a wonderful product to use as a general purpose database. I agree with the other respondent: If your project cannot possibly function without one or more of the features that MySQL does not provide, then don't use it. However, our feature set has been and continues to be complete and powerful enough to be the storage engine behind some of the internet's most popular and heavily visited websites. I can see reasons why some of the feature differences (aka overhead) may be useful in certain use cases. However there is a long history of popular usage that indicates that not everyone, or every project, requires the full set of features you describe: http://www.mysql.com/customers/ I agree with some of the points you make and we are working to implement some of the features you mentioned. On the other hand some of those deficiencies that you mention are specific strengths of the MySQL system: 23. There are fewer and less sophisticated tools for administration. MySQL doesn't need them. That alone should tell you something about our reliability. 24. There is no IDE and debugger that approaches the level of sophistication you may be accustomed to. You’ll probably be writing your stored procedures in a text editor and debugging them by adding statements that insert rows into a table called debug_log. Again, this is an indication that you don't *need* complex tools or a GUI to work with MySQL. The simple solution is often the better solution. It also allows you to develop for your server from practically anywhere, not just a machine where your GUI tools are installed. 25. Each table can have a different storage backend (”storage engine”). Yes, we absolutely allow this. Each engine brings a certain strength to the storage and retrieval solutions you can create with MySQL. We explicitly recognize that there is no one size fits all approach that meets the needs of every problem. This also allows for special-purpose solutions to be integrated into MySQL: http://solutions.mysql.com/solutions/?type=29 28. The default storage engine is non-transactional and corrupts easily. True: MyISAM is does not require the disk and CPU overhead of tracking changes transactionally. False: In my experience (I do work for Support) MyISAM is rarely corrupted. I dispute this claim. 29. Oracle owns InnoDB, the most advanced and popular storage engine. As of yesterday, this became a moot point. Oracle now owns MySQL, too. http://www.oracle.com/us/sun/index.htm 34. There are no integrated or add-on business intelligence, OLAP cube, etc packages. False. Please see: http://solutions.mysql.com/solutions/ 38. The number of joins per query is limited to 61. True, but why is this a problem? Do you frequently (or ever) need to join more than 61 tables into the same query? If you do, I propose that you need to revisit your schema design choices or review how you write your queries. In this case, I think we are discouraging bad practices. 39. MySQL supports a smaller subset of SQL syntax. There are no recursive queries, common table expressions, or windowing functions. There are a few extensions to SQL that are somewhat analogous to MERGE and similar features, but are very simplistic in comparison. Again, the vast majority of data storage and retrieval activities do not require these features. If you absolutely cannot function without them, then do not use MySQL. 44. There is no built-in promotion or failover mechanism. Again, we have no one size fits all approach to this. We do not assume to understand your business processes nor do we want you to design your process to support our procedures. The failover process is yours to design and implement as you see fit. 45. Replication is asynchronous and has many limitations and edge cases. For example, it is single-threaded, so a powerful slave can find it hard to replicate fast enough to keep up with a less powerful master. Yes, it is asynchronous. This is a distinct advantage to many read-heavy applications and it allows MySQL to scale out better than most, if not all, other RDBMS systems. http://www.mysql.com/why-mysql/white-papers/mysql_wp_scaleout.php http://www.mysql.com/why-mysql/scaleout/booking.html 49. There are no sequences. Please explain why auto_increment cannot meet this same need? Why have the overhead of two ways of performing essentially the same function? This is just one less way to confuse your design. -- Shawn Green, MySQL Senior Support Engineer Sun Microsystems, Inc. Office: Blountville, TN -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http
Re: 50 things to know before migrating from Oracle to MySQL
Shawn Green wrote: 23. There are fewer and less sophisticated tools for administration. MySQL doesn't need them. That alone should tell you something about our reliability. This speaks to simplicity-- both in terms of easy to use and in terms of more limited features. It says nothing about reliability. 45. Replication is asynchronous and has many limitations and edge cases. For example, it is single-threaded, so a powerful slave can find it hard to replicate fast enough to keep up with a less powerful master. Yes, it is asynchronous. This is a distinct advantage to many read-heavy applications and it allows MySQL to scale out better than most, if not all, other RDBMS systems. http://www.mysql.com/why-mysql/white-papers/mysql_wp_scaleout.php http://www.mysql.com/why-mysql/scaleout/booking.html There is a lot of truth to what the original poster says about MySQL replication edge cases, including those involving data integrity/data loss. These edge cases are by design, since it is the binlogs replicated, and not the particular storage engine's commit logs. It's one thing to scale out well when we're talking about comments to cat videos, as there is no harm done if my comment is lost or is slow to replicate around. It's another when we're talking financial transactions. -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/mysql?unsub=arch...@jab.org
Re: 50 things to know before migrating from Oracle to MySQL
On 1/28/2010 3:21 AM, changuno wrote: Hi folks, Read a blog which states 50 things to know before migrating from Oracle to MySQL. Any comments on this? would it have been too much to just link to it? -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/mysql?unsub=arch...@jab.org
RE: 50 things to know before migrating from Oracle to MySQL
-Original Message- From: John Meyer [mailto:johnme...@pueblocomputing.com] Sent: Thursday, January 28, 2010 2:16 PM To: mysql@lists.mysql.com On 1/28/2010 3:21 AM, changuno wrote: Read a blog which states 50 things to know before migrating from Oracle to MySQL. Any comments on this? would it have been too much to just link to it? Thought the same thing. Not only that, it would have been PREFERRED, so I can BOOKMARK it and SHARE it with my other colleagues. -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/mysql?unsub=arch...@jab.org
Re: 50 things to know before migrating from Oracle to MySQL
A quick Google turned up http://www.xaprb.com/blog/2009/03/13/50-things-to-know-before-migrating-oracle-to-mysql/ Man, I love Google. Thanks, Carl - Original Message - From: Daevid Vincent dae...@daevid.com To: mysql@lists.mysql.com Cc: 'changuno ' chang...@rediffmail.com Sent: Thursday, January 28, 2010 5:49 PM Subject: RE: 50 things to know before migrating from Oracle to MySQL -Original Message- From: John Meyer [mailto:johnme...@pueblocomputing.com] Sent: Thursday, January 28, 2010 2:16 PM To: mysql@lists.mysql.com On 1/28/2010 3:21 AM, changuno wrote: Read a blog which states 50 things to know before migrating from Oracle to MySQL. Any comments on this? would it have been too much to just link to it? Thought the same thing. Not only that, it would have been PREFERRED, so I can BOOKMARK it and SHARE it with my other colleagues. -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/mysql?unsub=c...@etrak-plus.com -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/mysql?unsub=arch...@jab.org
Re: 50 things to know before migrating from Oracle to MySQL
Doesn't Google run MySQL ? Hmmm On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 4:56 PM, Carl c...@etrak-plus.com wrote: A quick Google turned up http://www.xaprb.com/blog/2009/03/13/50-things-to-know-before-migrating-oracle-to-mysql/ Man, I love Google. Thanks, Carl - Original Message - From: Daevid Vincent dae...@daevid.com To: mysql@lists.mysql.com Cc: 'changuno ' chang...@rediffmail.com Sent: Thursday, January 28, 2010 5:49 PM Subject: RE: 50 things to know before migrating from Oracle to MySQL -Original Message- From: John Meyer [mailto:johnme...@pueblocomputing.com] Sent: Thursday, January 28, 2010 2:16 PM To: mysql@lists.mysql.com On 1/28/2010 3:21 AM, changuno wrote: Read a blog which states 50 things to know before migrating from Oracle to MySQL. Any comments on this? would it have been too much to just link to it? Thought the same thing. Not only that, it would have been PREFERRED, so I can BOOKMARK it and SHARE it with my other colleagues. -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/mysql?unsub=c...@etrak-plus.com -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/mysql?unsub=joh...@pixelated.net -- - Johnny Withers 601.209.4985 joh...@pixelated.net
FW: Oracle Finalizes Acquisition of Sun
To ensure delivery directly to your inbox please add repl...@oracle-mail.com to your address book today. Oracle Corporation http://www.oracle.com/dm/global_images/oracle_white2.gif http://www.oracle.com/dm/10h2corp/o_sun_redbox_clr.gif We are pleased to announce that Oracle has completed its acquisition of Sun Microsystems and Sun is now a wholly owned subsidiary of Oracle. With this news, we want to reiterate our commitment to deliver complete, open and integrated systems that help our customers improve the performance, reliability and security of their IT infrastructure. We would also like to thank the many customers that have supported us throughout the acquisition process. There is no doubt that this combination transforms the IT industry. With the addition of servers, storage, SPARC processors, the Solaris operating system, Java, and the MySQL database to Oracle's portfolio of database, middleware, and business and industry applications, we plan to engineer and deliver open and integrated systems - from applications to disk - where all the pieces fit and work together out of the box. Performance levels will be unmatched. Oracle's software already runs faster on Sun SPARC/Solaris than on any other server or operating system. With Sun as a part of Oracle, each layer of the stack will be engineered to further improve performance, reliability and manageability so that IT will be more predictable, more supportable, and more secure. Customers will benefit as their system performance goes up and their system integration and management costs go down. In addition, our open standards-based technology will give customers choice. Customers can purchase our fully integrated systems, or easily integrate our best-of-breed technologies with their existing environments. Our open technology also enables customers to take full advantage of third party innovations. Oracle also plans to extend its partner specialization program to include Sun technologies to better enable partners to deliver differentiated and value-added solutions to customers. As always, our primary goal is 100% customer satisfaction. We are dedicated to delivering without interruption the quality of support and service that you have come to expect from Oracle and Sun, and more. Oracle plans to enhance Sun customer support by improving support access, offering better interoperability support between Oracle and Sun products and delivering services in more local languages. Support procedures for your existing Sun and Oracle products are unchanged, so for now you should continue to use the same channels you've been using. Customers can continue to purchase products from Sun in the same way they did prior to the acquisition. We will communicate any changes to this through regular channels. We are very excited about this combination and look forward to delivering to you increased innovation through accelerated investment in Sun's hardware and software technologies such as SPARC, Solaris, Java, and MySQL. If you weren't able to join the live event on January 27 where we, along with Larry Ellison and other executives from Oracle and Sun outlined how this powerful combination will transform the IT industry, you are welcome to view the replay that can be accessed at http://www.oracle.com/us/sun/index.htm?msgid=8480102eid=4676080696lid=1 oracle.com/sun. Sincerely, Charles Phillips President Safra Catz President This document is for informational purposes only and may not be incorporated into a contract or agreement. SOFTWARE. HARDWARE. COMPLETE. http://www.oracle.com/dm/design/softhardcompl_line.png Copyright C 2010, Oracle. All rights reserved. http://www.oracle.com/us/corporate/contact/index.htm?msgid=8480102eid=467 6080696lid=1 Contact Us | http://www.oracle.com/html/copyright.html?msgid=8480102eid=4676080696lid =1 Legal Notices and Terms of Use | http://www.oracle.com/html/privacy.html?msgid=8480102eid=4676080696lid=1 Privacy Statement Oracle Corporation - Worldwide Headquarters, 500 Oracle Parkway, OPL - E-mail Services, Redwood Shores, CA 94065, United States
Re: Help with export and import into Oracle
machiel.richards wrote: Good day guys [snip] . Each item in the text field is added in the field by entering the country name then pressing enter and then entering the next, etc . When exporting the data to a file (even when enclosing each field within quotes) it still writes the control characters causing each item to be read as a different line and thus the import into Oracle fails. Any idea on how we can resolve this as the process needs to be cronned to run on a weekly basis and thus we need to get this process resolved. You haven't described what process you're using to read the file for the Oracle import - all of Oracle's interfaces (oci, SQL, PL/SQL, load utilities like SQL*Loader and imp/impdp, external tables, etc.) can handle multi-line records like this. Given you're dumping to a file, it's mostly likely you're using SQL*Loader (i.e. sqlldr). The INFILE clause for the control file includes an os_file_proc_clause which let's you set the record delimiter, and override the default end of line behaviour. See http://www.orafaq.com/wiki/SQL*Loader_FAQ#How_does_one_load_records_with_multi-line_fields.3F for an example. If you're not using SQL*Loader, then more info would be required. Ciao Fuzzy :-) Dazed and confused about technology for 20 years http://fuzzydata.wordpress.com/ -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/mysql?unsub=arch...@jab.org
RE: Help with export and import into Oracle
It seems that one of the tables we need to export and import contains rows which is used for dropdown menus. This has the following effect: . Each item in the text field is added in the field by entering the country name then pressing enter and then entering the next, etc . When exporting the data to a file (even when enclosing each field within quotes) it still writes the control characters causing each item to be read as a different line and thus the import into Oracle fails. [JS] Leaving aside my opinion that this is a bad way to store options for a dropdown menu, I think you will need to use the REPLACE() function liberally. In fact, you might consider using CONCAT_WS() to cram all of your fields into one and then using REPLACE() on the result. I don't know how that will work with your data, but I've done it before when otherwise stumped. Regards, Jerry Schwartz The Infoshop by Global Information Incorporated 195 Farmington Ave. Farmington, CT 06032 860.674.8796 / FAX: 860.674.8341 www.the-infoshop.com -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/mysql?unsub=arch...@jab.org
Help with export and import into Oracle
Good day guys I previously requested information regarding the exporting of data which needs to be imported into oracle. We are however still struggling with the data though and maybe someone can give me some ideas... It seems that one of the tables we need to export and import contains rows which is used for dropdown menus. This has the following effect: . Each item in the text field is added in the field by entering the country name then pressing enter and then entering the next, etc . When exporting the data to a file (even when enclosing each field within quotes) it still writes the control characters causing each item to be read as a different line and thus the import into Oracle fails. Any idea on how we can resolve this as the process needs to be cronned to run on a weekly basis and thus we need to get this process resolved. Your assistance is appreciated. Regards Machiel
Re: FW: MySQL export and import into Oracle
http://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.0/en/control-flow-functions.html#function_if On Fri, Jan 8, 2010 at 5:52 PM, machiel.richards machiel.richa...@gmail.com wrote: Hi guys, Can you please assist me in rewriting this query in order to run this against a mysql database? It seems that the decode function does not exist in mysql. select decode(nvl(receive_email, 'No'), 'Yes', 'Yes', 'No') email_corr, count(*) tot from profiles where email is not null group by (decode(nvl(receive_email, 'No'), 'Yes', 'Yes', 'No')) -- Best Regards, Prabhat Kumar MySQL DBA Datavail-India Mumbai Mobile : 91-9987681929 www.datavail.com My Blog: http://adminlinux.blogspot.com My LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/profileprabhat
RE: FW: MySQL export and import into Oracle
Thank you for the link but seeing that I am still new with MySQL , this does not mean anything to me. From: prabhat kumar [mailto:aim.prab...@gmail.com] Sent: 08 January 2010 4:22 PM To: machiel.richards Cc: mysql@lists.mysql.com Subject: Re: FW: MySQL export and import into Oracle http://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.0/en/control-flow-functions.html#function_ if On Fri, Jan 8, 2010 at 5:52 PM, machiel.richards machiel.richa...@gmail.com wrote: Hi guys, Can you please assist me in rewriting this query in order to run this against a mysql database? It seems that the decode function does not exist in mysql. select decode(nvl(receive_email, 'No'), 'Yes', 'Yes', 'No') email_corr, count(*) tot from profiles where email is not null group by (decode(nvl(receive_email, 'No'), 'Yes', 'Yes', 'No')) -- Best Regards, Prabhat Kumar MySQL DBA Datavail-India Mumbai Mobile : 91-9987681929 www.datavail.com My Blog: http://adminlinux.blogspot.com My LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/profileprabhat
Re: Oracle, Sun and MySQL
What I am more concerned about at the moment is how much the uncertainty over the deal is hurting MySQL? I was recently in a project planning meeting where MySQL was dismissed completely because nobody could give guarantees about where MySQL was going. There were a lot of concerns over where future development would go and a fear that when the deal goes through Oracle may slowly raise support and training costs to the sort of levels applicable to Oracle database products. These kind of arguments seem impossible to counter for as long as the uncertainty continues and I for one wish they would just resolve the situation either way very quickly because its hurting my business and open source software! regards John On Tue, 2009-11-10 at 23:50 -0600, Peter Brawley wrote: European regulators agree with Monty that the Oracle-Sun deal threatens database competition. Apparently Oracle means to play hardball. Meanwhile Sun revenue fell 25% in 3rd quarter 2009; who else but an anti-competitive giant would take a chance on buying Sun now? Story here: http://www.economist.com/businessfinance/displayStory.cfm?story_id=14840272; source=features_box1. PB -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/mysql?unsub=arch...@jab.org
Re: Oracle, Sun and MySQL
I believe MySQL will still have great influence in Open Source area. The better is that MySQL will be a separate Company which has no relation to Sun and Oracle. Maybe Oracle can sell MySQL to a 3rd company. 2009/11/11 John Daisley john.dais...@butterflysystems.co.uk What I am more concerned about at the moment is how much the uncertainty over the deal is hurting MySQL? I was recently in a project planning meeting where MySQL was dismissed completely because nobody could give guarantees about where MySQL was going. There were a lot of concerns over where future development would go and a fear that when the deal goes through Oracle may slowly raise support and training costs to the sort of levels applicable to Oracle database products. These kind of arguments seem impossible to counter for as long as the uncertainty continues and I for one wish they would just resolve the situation either way very quickly because its hurting my business and open source software! regards John On Tue, 2009-11-10 at 23:50 -0600, Peter Brawley wrote: European regulators agree with Monty that the Oracle-Sun deal threatens database competition. Apparently Oracle means to play hardball. Meanwhile Sun revenue fell 25% in 3rd quarter 2009; who else but an anti-competitive giant would take a chance on buying Sun now? Story here: http://www.economist.com/businessfinance/displayStory.cfm?story_id=14840272; source=features_box1. PB -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/mysql?unsub=hexi...@gmail.com -- Thanks Best regards, Xiong HE
Re: Oracle, Sun and MySQL
On Nov 11, 2009, at 9:34 AM, John Daisley wrote: On Tue, 2009-11-10 at 23:50 -0600, Peter Brawley wrote: European regulators agree with Monty that the Oracle-Sun deal threatens database competition. Apparently Oracle means to play hardball. Meanwhile Sun revenue fell 25% in 3rd quarter 2009; who else but an anti-competitive giant would take a chance on buying Sun now? Story here: http://www.economist.com/businessfinance/displayStory.cfm?story_id=14840272; source=features_box1. What I am more concerned about at the moment is how much the uncertainty over the deal is hurting MySQL? I was recently in a project planning meeting where MySQL was dismissed completely because nobody could give guarantees about where MySQL was going. There were a lot of concerns over where future development would go and a fear that when the deal goes through Oracle may slowly raise support and training costs to the sort of levels applicable to Oracle database products. These kind of arguments seem impossible to counter for as long as the uncertainty continues and I for one wish they would just resolve the situation either way very quickly because its hurting my business and open source software! Please remember that there are 3rd parties offering MySQL support already now, outside of MySQL AB. I'm pretty sure that should Oracle raise these prices, 3rd parties will take up that part of the market pretty quickly. Liz -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/mysql?unsub=arch...@jab.org
Re: Oracle, Sun and MySQL
On Nov 11, 2009, at 9:34 AM, John Daisley wrote: On Tue, 2009-11-10 at 23:50 -0600, Peter Brawley wrote: European regulators agree with Monty that the Oracle-Sun deal threatens database competition. Apparently Oracle means to play hardball. Meanwhile Sun revenue fell 25% in 3rd quarter 2009; who else but an anti-competitive giant would take a chance on buying Sun now? Story here: http://www.economist.com/businessfinance/displayStory.cfm?story_id=14840272; source=features_box1. What I am more concerned about at the moment is how much the uncertainty over the deal is hurting MySQL? I was recently in a project planning meeting where MySQL was dismissed completely because nobody could give guarantees about where MySQL was going. There were a lot of concerns over where future development would go and a fear that when the deal goes through Oracle may slowly raise support and training costs to the sort of levels applicable to Oracle database products. These kind of arguments seem impossible to counter for as long as the uncertainty continues and I for one wish they would just resolve the situation either way very quickly because its hurting my business and open source software! Please remember that there are 3rd parties offering MySQL support already now, outside of MySQL AB. I'm pretty sure that should Oracle raise these prices, 3rd parties will take up that part of the market pretty quickly. Liz I am aware of this Liz but corporate customers like to see support coming from 'source'. There is also a bit of an unknown with 3rd party support whereas MySQL's own support has a very good reputation and from personal experience I know it to be second to none. Regards John -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/mysql?unsub=arch...@jab.org
Re: Oracle, Sun and MySQL
Martin, What does monty say? Monty made a submission to EU regulators. I can't find the URL just now. One-line summary: Letting Oracle have MySQL is worse than putting the fox in charge of the henhouse... (Florian Mueller, http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-10379870-38.html). Other URLs: http://monty-says.blogspot.com/2009/10/press-release-concerning-oraclesun.html http://monty-says.blogspot.com/ http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-10379870-38.html PB http://www.artfulsoftware.com - Martin Gainty wrote: tendency to work normal working hours 7am-7pm PST which could be a problem for someone in Europe, Asia or even GMT+5 who needs an immediate answer and cant wait until 7am PST i too would like MySQL to stay OpenSource there is no better a feeling of applying a patch (for your own purposes) without having to wait for the corporate leviathans 6 month cycle to release a minor patch what does monty say? Martin Gainty __ Verzicht und Vertraulichkeitanmerkung/Note de déni et de confidentialité Diese Nachricht ist vertraulich. Sollten Sie nicht der vorgesehene Empfaenger sein, so bitten wir hoeflich um eine Mitteilung. Jede unbefugte Weiterleitung oder Fertigung einer Kopie ist unzulaessig. Diese Nachricht dient lediglich dem Austausch von Informationen und entfaltet keine rechtliche Bindungswirkung. Aufgrund der leichten Manipulierbarkeit von E-Mails koennen wir keine Haftung fuer den Inhalt uebernehmen. Ce message est confidentiel et peut être privilégié. Si vous n'êtes pas le destinataire prévu, nous te demandons avec bonté que pour satisfaire informez l'expéditeur. N'importe quelle diffusion non autorisée ou la copie de ceci est interdite. Ce message sert à l'information seulement et n'aura pas n'importe quel effet légalement obligatoire. Étant donné que les email peuvent facilement être sujets à la manipulation, nous ne pouvons accepter aucune responsabilité pour le contenu fourni. Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2009 12:48:28 + Subject: Re: Oracle, Sun and MySQL From: j...@butterflysystems.co.uk To: l...@dijkmat.nl CC: john.dais...@butterflysystems.co.uk; peter.braw...@earthlink.net; mysql@lists.mysql.com On Nov 11, 2009, at 9:34 AM, John Daisley wrote: On Tue, 2009-11-10 at 23:50 -0600, Peter Brawley wrote: European regulators agree with Monty that the Oracle-Sun deal threatens database competition. Apparently Oracle means to play hardball. Meanwhile Sun revenue fell 25% in 3rd quarter 2009; who else but an anti-competitive giant would take a chance on buying Sun now? Story here: http://www.economist.com/businessfinance/displayStory.cfm?story_id=14840272; source=features_box1. What I am more concerned about at the moment is how much the uncertainty over the deal is hurting MySQL? I was recently in a project planning meeting where MySQL was dismissed completely because nobody could give guarantees about where MySQL was going. There were a lot of concerns over where future development would go and a fear that when the deal goes through Oracle may slowly raise support and training costs to the sort of levels applicable to Oracle database products. These kind of arguments seem impossible to counter for as long as the uncertainty continues and I for one wish they would just resolve the situation either way very quickly because its hurting my business and open source software! Please remember that there are 3rd parties offering MySQL support already now, outside of MySQL AB. I'm pretty sure that should Oracle raise these prices, 3rd parties will take up that part of the market pretty quickly. Liz I am aware of this Liz but corporate customers like to see support coming from 'source'. There is also a bit of an unknown with 3rd party support whereas MySQL's own support has a very good reputation and from personal experience I know it to be second to none. Regards John -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql?unsub=mgai...@hotmail.com Bing brings you maps, menus, and reviews organized in one place. Try it now. http://www.bing.com/search?q=restaurantsform=MFESRPpubl=WLHMTAGcrea=TEXT_MFESRP_Local_MapsMenu_Resturants_1x1 No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 8.5.425 / Virus Database: 270.14.60/2496 - Release Date: 11/11/09 07:40:00
Oracle, Sun and MySQL
European regulators agree with Monty that the Oracle-Sun deal threatens database competition. Apparently Oracle means to play hardball. Meanwhile Sun revenue fell 25% in 3rd quarter 2009; who else but an anti-competitive giant would take a chance on buying Sun now? Story here: http://www.economist.com/businessfinance/displayStory.cfm?story_id=14840272; source=features_box1. PB
Select clause using from and to (like rownum in Oracle)
Hi All, I am facing a problem in porting an application written for oracle to run on mysql. The application uses a sqlmap (ibatis) at the heart of which is basically a file that defines all sql's used in the application. It is very well organized this way. The application uses Oracle as the database. The problem is that for pagination purposes the sql's written use rownum and accept 2 arguments - the from rownum and the to rownum. I am trying to run the same application on my laptop that runs mysql. I have migrated all data and all the sql queries work perfectly except the one that use pagination and the rownum. I know in mysql there is support for sql using the LIMIT clause, but the LIMIT seems to take 2 arguments, the first one being the start rownum and the second being the number of rows to output. I need the second to be the to rownum. I have done a lot of googling, but apart from just putting a rownum for the sql output there was no real usages for pagination purposes. I cannot use the LIMIT as it is in mysql, because that would mean I would have to change the application logic which I do not want to do. I also do not want to install Oracle on my laptop, just too heavy. I have found this to work except I am not sure how to pass a where clause for the rownum part: SELECT @rownum:=...@rownum+1 rownum, t.*FROM (SELECT @rownum:=0) r, user_approvers t I was trying something like: SELECT @rownum:=...@rownum+1 rownum, t.*FROM (SELECT @rownum:=0) r, user_approvers t where r.rownum between 10, 20; or even SELECT @rownum:=...@rownum+1 rownum, t.*FROM (SELECT @rownum:=0) r, user_approvers t where r.rownum=1; I get the error: ERROR 1054 (42S22): Unknown column 'r.rownum' in 'where clause' Is there anyway the SELECT query can be forced to use the from and to rownum parameters? Thanks a lot for any help, Anoop
Re: Select clause using from and to (like rownum in Oracle)
Is there anyway the SELECT query can be forced to use the from and to rownum parameters? 1st LIMIT arg = OracleFromArg 2nd LIMIT arg = OracleToArg - OracleFromArg + 1 so 'from 11 to 20' becomes LIMIT 11,10. PB - Anoop kumar V wrote: Hi All, I am facing a problem in porting an application written for oracle to run on mysql. The application uses a sqlmap (ibatis) at the heart of which is basically a file that defines all sql's used in the application. It is very well organized this way. The application uses Oracle as the database. The problem is that for pagination purposes the sql's written use rownum and accept 2 arguments - the from rownum and the to rownum. I am trying to run the same application on my laptop that runs mysql. I have migrated all data and all the sql queries work perfectly except the one that use pagination and the rownum. I know in mysql there is support for sql using the LIMIT clause, but the LIMIT seems to take 2 arguments, the first one being the start rownum and the second being the number of rows to output. I need the second to be the to rownum. I have done a lot of googling, but apart from just putting a rownum for the sql output there was no real usages for pagination purposes. I cannot use the LIMIT as it is in mysql, because that would mean I would have to change the application logic which I do not want to do. I also do not want to install Oracle on my laptop, just too heavy. I have found this to work except I am not sure how to pass a where clause for the rownum part: SELECT @rownum:=...@rownum+1 rownum, t.*FROM (SELECT @rownum:=0) r, user_approvers t I was trying something like: SELECT @rownum:=...@rownum+1 rownum, t.*FROM (SELECT @rownum:=0) r, user_approvers t where r.rownum between 10, 20; or even SELECT @rownum:=...@rownum+1 rownum, t.*FROM (SELECT @rownum:=0) r, user_approvers t where r.rownum=1; I get the error: ERROR 1054 (42S22): Unknown column 'r.rownum' in 'where clause' Is there anyway the SELECT query can be forced to use the from and to rownum parameters? Thanks a lot for any help, Anoop No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 8.5.409 / Virus Database: 270.13.63/2317 - Release Date: 08/21/09 06:04:00
Select clause using from and to (like rownum in Oracle)
Never mind. I got it to work.. I had to really trim down the entire statement: set @sql = concat( select iams_id as iamsId ,division_name as divisionName ,region_name as regionName ,isactive as isActive from user_approvers limit , #from#, ,, (#from#-#to#+1) ); prepare stmt from @sql; execute stmt; drop prepare stmt; But I am not able to use it as a sqlmapped statement in iBatis, but that is a separate problem for a different user list.. but you gave me the idea so far and it works. Thanks very much. Thanks, Anoop On Fri, Aug 21, 2009 at 8:26 PM, Anoop kumar V anoopkum...@gmail.comwrote: I am having trouble executing what you have sent. Below is output mysql set @sql = concat( select iams_id as iamsId ,division_name as divisionName ,region_name as regionName ,isactive as isActive from ( select iams_id ,division_name ,region_name ,isactive from user_approvers ) order by rn limit , 10, ,, (20-10+1) ); Query OK, 0 rows affected (0.03 sec) mysql prepare stmt from @sql; ERROR 1248 (42000): Every derived table must have its own alias mysql execute stmt; ERROR 1243 (HY000): Unknown prepared statement handler (stmt) given to EXECUTE mysql drop prepare stmt; ERROR 1243 (HY000): Unknown prepared statement handler (stmt) given to DEALLOCATE PREPARE mysql mysql set @sql = concat( select iams_id as iamsId ,division_name as divisionName ,region_name as regionName ,isactive as isActive from ( select iams_id ,division_name ,region_name ,isactive from user_approvers ) a order by rn limit , 10, ,, (20-10+1) ); Query OK, 0 rows affected (0.00 sec) mysql prepare stmt from @sql; ERROR 1054 (42S22): Unknown column 'rn' in 'order clause' mysql execute stmt; ERROR 1243 (HY000): Unknown prepared statement handler (stmt) given to EXECUTE mysql drop prepare stmt; ERROR 1243 (HY000): Unknown prepared statement handler (stmt) given to DEALLOCATE PREPARE mysql mysql set @sql = concat( select iams_id as iamsId ,division_name as divisionName ,region_name as regionName ,isactive as isActive from ( select iams_id ,division_name ,region_name ,isactive from user_approvers ) a limit , 10, ,, (20-10+1) ); Query OK, 0 rows affected (0.00 sec) mysql prepare stmt from @sql; ERROR 1064 (42000): You have an error in your SQL syntax; check the manual that corresponds to your MySQL server version for the right syntax to use near 'limit 10,11' at line 13 mysql execute stmt; ERROR 1243 (HY000): Unknown prepared statement handler (stmt) given to EXECUTE mysql drop prepare stmt; ERROR 1243 (HY000): Unknown prepared statement handler (stmt) given to DEALLOCATE PREPARE mysql mysql Thanks, Anoop On Fri, Aug 21, 2009 at 7:22 PM, Peter Brawley peter.braw...@earthlink.net wrote: I think you'd need to use Prepare, eg replace the query with ... set @sql = concat( select user_id as iamsId ,division_name as divisionName ,region_name as regionName ,isactive as isActive from ( select user_id ,division_name ,region_name ,isactive from user_approvers ) order by rn limit , #from, ,, (#to-#from+1) ); prepare stmt from @sql; execute stmt; drop prepare stmt; PB - Anoop kumar V wrote: Thanks very much Peter. But I think I did figure that much. What I am lacking is the integration of that logic into the sql. The current sql (made for oracle) is like this - I can change it all I want because of the sql map which is configurable... select user_id as iamsId ,division_name as divisionName ,region_name as regionName ,isactive as isActive from ( select user_id ,division_name ,region_name ,isactive ,row_number() over (order by division_name, region_name) rn from user_approvers ) where rn between #from# and #to# order by rn I can change everything but the parameters to the sql: #from# and #to#. These come from the application logic and is user enterred (not directly, but through pagination etc - you get the idea) I tried things like the following (to get rows from 11 to 20): select * from user_approvers limit 10, 20-10; Also tried assigning variables.. still no go
Does MySQL have the same function as the ORACLE TDE technique?
Hi. Here is the introduction. http://www.oracle.com/technology/oramag/oracle/05-sep/o55security.html I want to know whether MySQL has the same function as Oracle's? Any reply is appreciated. -- David Yeung, MySQL Senior Support Engineer, Sun Gold Partner. My Blog:http://yueliangdao0608.cublog.cn
RE: Oracle , what else ?
On Thu, 2009-04-23 at 17:58 +0100, Gabriel - IP Guys wrote: The real question is whether they will let MySQL wither and die by not providing updates for it? Well, MySQL is open source, right? And the source is available? I'm sure a team of devs will come to the rescue. As for MySQL, as a company, they don't make even close to the potential money they can. People do not really go to MySQL for support, which is the model RedHat uses. For MySQL, it's different, because the MySQL userbase by their very nature, solve problems for a living. They have the attitude of how can I fix things? How do I make things work the way I want? This has a serious adverse effect on MySQL as a company, because the number one revenue stream for any company whos main 'product' or 'service' is open source based, is the support contract. The code is available under the GPL but the documentation is not. Without adequate documentation a project becomes less accessible and less used. -Janek -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/mysql?unsub=arch...@jab.org
RE: Oracle , what else ?
On Thu, 2009-04-23 at 17:58 +0100, Gabriel - IP Guys wrote: The real question is whether they will let MySQL wither and die by not providing updates for it? Well, MySQL is open source, right? And the source is available? I'm sure a team of devs will come to the rescue. As for MySQL, as a company, they don't make even close to the potential money they can. People do not really go to MySQL for support, which is the model RedHat uses. For MySQL, it's different, because the MySQL userbase by their very nature, solve problems for a living. They have the attitude of how can I fix things? How do I make things work the way I want? This has a serious adverse effect on MySQL as a company, because the number one revenue stream for any company whos main 'product' or 'service' is open source based, is the support contract. The code is available under the GPL but the documentation is not. Without adequate documentation a project becomes less accessible and less used. -Janek At the MySQL Conference Expo 2009 they were talking about making the documentation GPL. Lets hope they press on with that! -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql?unsub=john.dais...@butterflysystems.co.uk __ This email has been scanned by Netintelligence http://www.netintelligence.com/email -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/mysql?unsub=arch...@jab.org
RE: Oracle , what else ?
On Thu, 2009-04-23 at 17:58 +0100, Gabriel - IP Guys wrote: The real question is whether they will let MySQL wither and die by not providing updates for it? Well, MySQL is open source, right? And the source is available? I'm sure a team of devs will come to the rescue. As for MySQL, as a company, they don't make even close to the potential money they can. People do not really go to MySQL for support, which is the model RedHat uses. For MySQL, it's different, because the MySQL userbase by their very nature, solve problems for a living. They have the attitude of how can I fix things? How do I make things work the way I want? This has a serious adverse effect on MySQL as a company, because the number one revenue stream for any company whos main 'product' or 'service' is open source based, is the support contract. The code is available under the GPL but the documentation is not. Without adequate documentation a project becomes less accessible and less used. -Janek -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/mysql?unsub=arch...@jab.org
RE: Oracle , what else ?
In case anyone is interested, here is Monty's views on the Oracle buyout. http://monty-says.blogspot.com/2009/04/to-be-free-or-not-to-be-free.html Mike -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/mysql?unsub=arch...@jab.org
Re: Oracle , what else ?
On Fri, 2009-04-24 at 10:42 -0700, David Sparks wrote: -- PostgreSQL - XMPP: jdr...@jabber.postgresql.org Your FUD would be better posted on a Postres list with all the onging discussions on how Mysql doesn't support foreign keys, transactions, etc. There is no FUD here. The question was asked, I supplied my thoughts. Further I never suggested any of the things you are stating. Sincerely, Joshua D. Drake -- PostgreSQL - XMPP: jdr...@jabber.postgresql.org Consulting, Development, Support, Training 503-667-4564 - http://www.commandprompt.com/ The PostgreSQL Company, serving since 1997 -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/mysql?unsub=arch...@jab.org
Re: Oracle , what else ?
On Fri, 2009-04-24 at 18:15 +, Glyn Astill wrote: Begone Postgres troll! Oh the hostility of a scorned mysql user. Joshua has posted no more FUD than you mysql chaps have done yourselvs over the past few days. You were worried about the future and he's posted a few ideas of how you can prepare. That said I do agree he's jumped in at the right time to do a bit of Postgres pushin' and pimpin' :-) You have to take your opportunities when you can :) Sincerely, Joshua D. Drake -- PostgreSQL - XMPP: jdr...@jabber.postgresql.org Consulting, Development, Support, Training 503-667-4564 - http://www.commandprompt.com/ The PostgreSQL Company, serving since 1997 -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/mysql?unsub=arch...@jab.org
Re: Oracle , what else ?
On Fri, 2009-04-24 at 12:15 -0700, David Sparks wrote: Glyn Astill wrote: Begone Postgres troll! Oh the hostility of a scorned mysql user. Joshua has posted no more FUD than you mysql chaps have done yourselvs over the past few days. You were worried about the future and he's posted a few ideas of how you can prepare. No he didn't. He posted doom and gloom: Boy you really just can't handle someone not agreeing with you can you? It will be a supported but second class citizen from Oracle. Yes, and I stand by that. Oracle is not interested in the 1000/yr business. For the most part that is where MySQL revenue is. All you have to do is look at the SEC filings and the pricing sheet. maintain it long enough to allow MySQL to kill itself. Which I do still believe will happen. I would expect that MySQL in two years likely won't exist except on the most tertiary level. How we take one piece of the whole puzzle to make our point in the fruitless effort to discredit those who are clearly more well thought out than you. My whole point was: I would expect that MySQL in two years likely won't exist except on the most tertiary level. Most new projects will be developed in either PostgreSQL, Interbase or one of the forks (MariaDB, Drizzle). Considering my discussion with Monty this weekend, I would exert that the above is even more true. MariaDB is set to be a meritocracy based, true community (something the current MySQL is not). I expect that it will return to a quality form of development of release when ready not when the marketing droids force you to. I have a strong faith (even if I am not technically interested) in the direction Monty is going with MariaDB. I expect to see great things. One more time: begone Postgres troll! Based on your definition of troll, I would say that I am more a MariaDB troll. Sincerely, Joshua D. Drake -- PostgreSQL - XMPP: jdr...@jabber.postgresql.org Consulting, Development, Support, Training 503-667-4564 - http://www.commandprompt.com/ The PostgreSQL Company, serving since 1997 -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/mysql?unsub=arch...@jab.org
Re: Oracle , what else ?
Well, MySQL is open source, right? And the source is available? I'm sure a team of devs will come to the rescue. Really? What would make a group of developers wanting to develop a -database engine- for free? Some party needs to step up and pay those people, else you're beloved product will go no-where. Open source, yes, but free, no way ... When it comes to free usuage, people can go to PostgreSQL or Firebird, hey, some parties might even be better off, cause those two don't need a license for commercial usuage! With regards, Martijn Tonies Upscene Productions http://www.upscene.com Download Database Workbench for Oracle, MS SQL Server, Sybase SQL Anywhere, MySQL, InterBase, NexusDB and Firebird! Database questions? Check the forum: http://www.databasedevelopmentforum.com -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/mysql?unsub=arch...@jab.org
Re: Oracle , what else ?
On Fri, 2009-04-24 at 08:44 +0200, Martijn Tonies wrote: Well, MySQL is open source, right? And the source is available? I'm sure a team of devs will come to the rescue. Really? What would make a group of developers wanting to develop a -database engine- for free? Some party needs to step up and pay those people, else you're beloved product will go no-where. SQL Lite and PostgreSQL were both originally developed for free. Yes much of PostgreSQL is sponsored by people who now get paid to work on the product but that isn't 100% the case and it took a long way to get there. That being said, this is a good point. A team of developers are likely not to pick up MySQL unless they get paid. There are too many as good or better options that are also open source. Sincerely, Joshua D. Drake -- PostgreSQL - XMPP: jdr...@jabber.postgresql.org Consulting, Development, Support, Training 503-667-4564 - http://www.commandprompt.com/ The PostgreSQL Company, serving since 1997 -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/mysql?unsub=arch...@jab.org
Re: Oracle , what else ?
At 01:44 AM 4/24/2009, Martijn Tonies wrote: Well, MySQL is open source, right? And the source is available? I'm sure a team of devs will come to the rescue. Really? What would make a group of developers wanting to develop a -database engine- for free? Some party needs to step up and pay those people, else you're beloved product will go no-where. Correct. There are multi-million dollar companies using MySQL who would lose their investment and skill set if they switched to another database. These are the ones likely willing to fund for continued development of MySQL, like the Firebird community who took up the development of the Interbase fork. There is a huge interest in MySQL and no matter what happens, it will be around for some time to come. If Oracle was smart, they should put a lot of effort into supporting it. Open source, yes, but free, no way ... When it comes to free usuage, people can go to PostgreSQL or Firebird, hey, some parties might even be better off, cause those two don't need a license for commercial usuage! I agree. They are better choices for commercial development because of the MySQL licensing policies. But no such licenses are needed for web development which is where MySQL dominates. I doubt MySQL AB makes a lot of money from licenses anyway. When was the last time you saw MySQL on a desk top? The real money is in support, just ask IBM. If Oracle dropped the licensing restrictions on MySQL altogether and charged only for support, it would put MySQL on many more desk tops and I feel they could profit from it immensely. Oracle would have a high end database and a low end database and they would end up dominating the database marketplace. It's like a manufacturer coming out with a generic no-name product to compete with its higher end product. It is done all the time in the food industry. They'd rather have the customer using their generic product than lose the customer to a competitor. Hopefully Oracle sees it that way. Just one guy's opinion. Mike -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/mysql?unsub=arch...@jab.org
RE: Oracle , what else ?
On Fri, 2009-04-24 at 10:56 -0400, Martin Gainty wrote: IF MySQL returns to opensource..(presumably under Monty's benevolent leadership) then packages that utilise MySQL could be for paying clients only from your perspective what is the future of MySQL? Interesting question. I think MySQL will live on in various incarnations but I do think its glory days are over. It will be a supported but second class citizen from Oracle. I was at Innotech yesterday speaking on the open source panel (http://vimeo.com/4307197) and one of the participants stated that they were nervous about the fact that MySQL had been bought twice in the last two years. I did mention that I didn't think MySQL was going away and that Oracle is a smart company and there is a lot of mind share with MySQL. However, Oracle is not interested in the 1000/yr business. For the most part that is where MySQL revenue is. It is estimated that MySQL AB was only doing 50M a year when they were bought by Sun. 50M a year is petty cash for Oracle. So Oracle has two choices, completely change MySQL to make it more profitable and thus alienate its main user base (small websites) or maintain it long enough to allow MySQL to kill itself. MySQL is already killing itself through the various forks that have permeated through the last 9 months. Another issue I see is the potential for mass migration from MySQL by non web applications. Yes there are a lot of them. Why? Because one way Oracle can make money from MySQL is to continue to charge for linked software against MySQL. If you are building a web app as long as your web language is open source, you are good with the GPL. However if you are building a monolithic app in say C++ you have a serious problem because the nature of the GPL guarantees that your C++ app will have to be open source. As much as a lot of us are pro Open Source the majority (by far) of the world still isn't. MySQL does have a strong following in the appliance state in this way. I would expect that MySQL in two years likely won't exist except on the most tertiary level. Most new projects will be developed in either PostgreSQL, Interbase or one of the forks (MariaDB, Drizzle). Sincerely, Joshua D. Drake -- PostgreSQL - XMPP: jdr...@jabber.postgresql.org Consulting, Development, Support, Training 503-667-4564 - http://www.commandprompt.com/ The PostgreSQL Company, serving since 1997 -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/mysql?unsub=arch...@jab.org
Re: Oracle , what else ?
Joshua D. Drake wrote: I would expect that MySQL in two years likely won't exist except on the most tertiary level. Most new projects will be developed in either PostgreSQL, Interbase or one of the forks (MariaDB, Drizzle). Sincerely, Joshua D. Drake -- PostgreSQL - XMPP: jdr...@jabber.postgresql.org Your FUD would be better posted on a Postres list with all the onging discussions on how Mysql doesn't support foreign keys, transactions, etc. Begone Postgres troll! ds -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/mysql?unsub=arch...@jab.org
Re: Oracle , what else ?
--- On Fri, 24/4/09, David Sparks d...@ca.sophos.com wrote: From: David Sparks d...@ca.sophos.com Subject: Re: Oracle , what else ? To: j...@commandprompt.com j...@commandprompt.com Cc: mysql@lists.mysql.com mysql@lists.mysql.com Date: Friday, 24 April, 2009, 6:42 PM Joshua D. Drake wrote: I would expect that MySQL in two years likely won't exist except on the most tertiary level. Most new projects will be developed in either PostgreSQL, Interbase or one of the forks (MariaDB, Drizzle). Sincerely, Joshua D. Drake -- PostgreSQL - XMPP: jdr...@jabber.postgresql.org Your FUD would be better posted on a Postres list with all the onging discussions on how Mysql doesn't support foreign keys, transactions, etc. Begone Postgres troll! Oh the hostility of a scorned mysql user. Joshua has posted no more FUD than you mysql chaps have done yourselvs over the past few days. You were worried about the future and he's posted a few ideas of how you can prepare. That said I do agree he's jumped in at the right time to do a bit of Postgres pushin' and pimpin' :-) -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/mysql?unsub=arch...@jab.org
Re: Oracle , what else ?
Glyn Astill wrote: Begone Postgres troll! Oh the hostility of a scorned mysql user. Joshua has posted no more FUD than you mysql chaps have done yourselvs over the past few days. You were worried about the future and he's posted a few ideas of how you can prepare. No he didn't. He posted doom and gloom: It will be a supported but second class citizen from Oracle. Oracle is not interested in the 1000/yr business. For the most part that is where MySQL revenue is. maintain it long enough to allow MySQL to kill itself. I would expect that MySQL in two years likely won't exist except on the most tertiary level. One more time: begone Postgres troll! Switching gears ... All said, I'm cautiously optimistic that Oracle taking over the reins to Mysql will benefit all. Mysql is the long running leader in the open source database space, and with the DB smarts of Oracle behind it I expect to see the gap between Mysql and the other open source DB servers widen, not close up. Mysql is getting better at a pace that is making the other open source DB servers irrelevant. ds -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/mysql?unsub=arch...@jab.org
Re: Oracle , what else ?
--- On Fri, 24/4/09, David Sparks d...@ca.sophos.com wrote: Mysql is getting better at a pace that is making the other open source DB servers irrelevant. lol. Is that a typo? Surely you wanted to say Mysql's bug fix list is gathering pace... -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/mysql?unsub=arch...@jab.org
Re: Oracle , what else ?
--- On Wed, 22/4/09, Joshua D. Drake j...@commandprompt.com wrote: From: Joshua D. Drake j...@commandprompt.com Subject: Re: Oracle , what else ? To: Martijn Tonies m.ton...@upscene.com Cc: mysql@lists.mysql.com Date: Wednesday, 22 April, 2009, 10:45 PM On Tue, 2009-04-21 at 15:19 +0200, Martijn Tonies wrote: Hey Gilles, After MySQL bought by the java maker, and now Sun bought by Oracle, what are we gonna run as RDBMS ? How about PostgreSQL? I second that. You should all have a play with the 8.4 beta -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/mysql?unsub=arch...@jab.org
Re: Oracle , what else ?
On 21.04.2009 18:40 CE(S)T, mos wrote: At 08:06 AM 4/21/2009, Gilles MISSONNIER wrote: what are we gonna run as RDBMS ? It seems like the little fish are getting eaten by the bigger fish. I understand Microsoft is now going to buy Oracle. :-) (Sorry, just kidding) No, that would be funny. Microsoft buying Oracle - the new world software company name would be Miracle then! :-D Of course, Oracle will have bought IBM for their DB2 system and Java affinity before, and Microsoft will as well have bought Adobe for their PDF and Flash technologies. Then, MySQL is going to be abandoned by Miracle (they still have MSSQL, which may be a re-labelled DB2 with full PL/SQL compatibility then...) and a new small company is taking over the Open Source MySQL development... At least my crystal ball home oracle says so. But maybe I should clean it again to see things more accurately. ;-) -- Yves Goergen LonelyPixel nospam.l...@unclassified.de Visit my web laboratory at http://beta.unclassified.de -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/mysql?unsub=arch...@jab.org
Re: Oracle , what else ?
On Thu, 2009-04-23 at 08:25 +, Glyn Astill wrote: --- On Wed, 22/4/09, Joshua D. Drake j...@commandprompt.com wrote: what are we gonna run as RDBMS ? How about PostgreSQL? I second that. You should all have a play with the 8.4 beta I actually think a lot of primarily MySQL people are missing a lot of great stuff in PostgreSQL. Of course I am biased but when I look at the complaints about PostgreSQL they are largely based on years old information that is out of date. Alternately it is people who really don't know anything about databases but understand how to use MySQL. That is obviously a compelling argument. If I know how to use something and it does what I need, why change? The only counter argument I can provide to you is that there is a good chance you don't know what you are missing. Give it a shot. There are plenty of Pg people that would be happy to help MySQL people make their migration. Sincerely, Joshua D. Drake -- PostgreSQL - XMPP: jdr...@jabber.postgresql.org Consulting, Development, Support, Training 503-667-4564 - http://www.commandprompt.com/ The PostgreSQL Company, serving since 1997 -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/mysql?unsub=arch...@jab.org
RE: Oracle , what else ?
-Original Message- After MySQL bought by the java maker, and now Sun bought by Oracle, How did I miss this!? It seems like the little fish are getting eaten by the bigger fish. I understand Microsoft is now going to buy Oracle. :-) (Sorry, just kidding) The real question is whether they will let MySQL wither and die by not providing updates for it? Well, MySQL is open source, right? And the source is available? I'm sure a team of devs will come to the rescue. As for MySQL, as a company, they don't make even close to the potential money they can. People do not really go to MySQL for support, which is the model RedHat uses. For MySQL, it's different, because the MySQL userbase by their very nature, solve problems for a living. They have the attitude of how can I fix things? How do I make things work the way I want? This has a serious adverse effect on MySQL as a company, because the number one revenue stream for any company whos main 'product' or 'service' is open source based, is the support contract. Is Oracle is too big to make MySQL updates any kind of priority? The updates are not going to be a priority, granted - but compatibility might be their goal. If they can produce an upgrade path straight to Oracle, for all the current users of MySQL, the price paid for Sun, will be like peanuts, an investment for a better future. But let's not forget, Sun have some pretty kick ass systems on the go. I've seen their thin client setup, for things like presentations, and just being able to work at any terminal in the building/small group of close proximity buildings/across the entire city . *sweet!* It seems that the larger the company and the more products they have, the less interest they have in their lower revenue making products. I hope this is not the case with Oracle, but the updates in the next year will determine where MySQL is headed. Just one guy's opinion. Mike It's a good opinion Mike :) -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/mysql?unsub=arch...@jab.org
Re: Oracle , what else ?
At 07:13 PM 4/21/2009, you wrote: It will great if the MYSQL guys were to buy mysql from Oracle for half the price that Sun paid. Yeah, I'm sure Widenous is writing a check as we speak. rofl He is busy working on Maria, a stripped down branch of MySQL. http://monty-says.blogspot.com/2008/01/maria-engine-is-released.html They would come out making lots of money and back controlling their own destiny. Anyone can have control of the MySQL code because it is GPL. The only thing stopping them is time and $$$ to organize another company, maybe call it MySQL CD?? Mike :-) On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 4:47 PM, Arthur Fuller fuller.art...@gmail.comwrote: I hereby bet the farm that this shall not occur. I have $10 to say that this shall not occur. a) Who is going to challenge the deal? b) What possible purpose would it serve to interr MySQL? c) Assuming there is some reason for b) above, why incur the wrath of the MySQL community and their possible bail-outs? Nothing gained and everything lost, in such a move. d) If we know anything, we know that Scott and Larry are not fools. e) In the grand scheme of things, the MySQL piece of this pie is peanuts and perhaps less. This acquisition is about the big picture (hardware platform + existing Sparc base + Java, etc.). MySQL, as much as we love it, is a tiny teensy part of this acquisition, and my guess is that Scott and Larry are much more focussed on the other parts (e.g. end-to-end solutions extending from the hardware to the middleware to the Oracle apps, etc.) and in this ballpark MySQL is an interesting tidbit but not at all the focus of their efforts. Think big, baby. MySQL in this context is a tiny little ripple in the pond, having little or nothing to do with Scott/Larry's plans. Viewed from this perspective, MySQL becomes a viable alternative to such offerings as SQL Express from MS. If for no other reasons than marketing imperatives, I am confident that Scott and Larry will choose not to kill MySQL but rather regard it as both an entry platform and a position from which to upgrade to Oracle. Make no mistake about this. There are very sound reasons to upgrade to Oracle. Cost is of course a serious issue. But Oracle can do things, and has various top-end vehicles, that MySQL cannot approach. Consider, to take just one example, Trusted Oracle, upon which numerous banks bet their bottom dollar. Add to this the numerous Oracle Apps. I am no champion of Oracle in particular, but I do rtheecognize what platforms X and Y can do. If the game is defined as retrieval amongst several GB of data, then MySQL has a chance. If the game is retrieval amongst several PB of data, with security, then I bet on Oracle. Granted, this move requires a team of DBAs etc., but if you are dealing with PetaBytes then I suggest that you think carefully about which vendor is prepared to take you there. Just my $0.02 in this debate. I don't see MySQL and Oracle as competitive products. In fact I see the opposite: Oracle gets to occupy a space in the open-source community while simultanwously offering an upgrade path to multi-petabyte solutions, serious security, and so on. I don't think that Scott and Larry are out to hurt the MySQL community, and I'm prepared to bet that they will invest in the next version of MySQL, You might disagree but I challenge you to answer Why? Sheer rapaciousness? That doesn't make sense. MySQL has garnered numerous big-time players, and in what possible interest would Oracle jeapordize these investments? As several writers on this thread have said, if Oracle muddies the waters then they are prepared to move to PostGres and/or several other alternatives, not least to take the MySQL sources to a new playpen. It is clearly not in the interests of Oracle to let this happen. Far more interesting is to fold the MySQL project into Oracle's overall Linux project. Continue to offer MySQL for free, work on transport vehicles that let MySQL people migrate effortlessly to Oracle, etc. I don't mean to pretend to read Scott and Larry's minds here. But I think that the MySQL part of this acquisition, while interesting, is a small part of the rationale for buying Sun. The serious interest is in acquiring an end-to-end solution, as yet offered by nobody, including IBM and MS. This is the most significant part of this acquisition. Imagine being the salesperson of said stack. We have the hardware and the operating system and the middleware and the front-end. Click and go. IMO this is a truly formidable argument. In practice, it could be delivered as an appliance and/or a blade. And if you don't think this is formidable, then wake up and smell the coffee. This could well leap-frog certain other competitors -- which is not to say they won't catch up eventually, but it is to say that Oracle has raised the bar and it's time for competitors such as MS to jump through several flaming hoops
Re: Oracle , what else ?
It will great if the MYSQL guys were to buy mysql from Oracle for half the price that Sun paid. Yeah, I'm sure Widenous is writing a check as we speak. rofl He is busy working on Maria, a stripped down branch of MySQL. http://monty-says.blogspot.com/2008/01/maria-engine-is-released.html They would come out making lots of money and back controlling their own destiny. Anyone can have control of the MySQL code because it is GPL. The only thing stopping them is time and $$$ to organize another company, maybe call it MySQL CD?? The MySQL name is not free though, it's owned by MySQL AB (or Sun nowadays). So even if a fork happens, it cannot take the mysql name, having to rename tools/filenames in order to work. And after that, it has to stick with the community public. With regards, Martijn Tonies Upscene Productions http://www.upscene.com Download FREE Database Workbench Lite for MySQL! Database questions? Check the forum: http://www.databasedevelopmentforum.com -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/mysql?unsub=arch...@jab.org
Re: Oracle , what else ?
i agree with you, Since mysql code is GPL anyone can start developing further wither another name say 'MySQL NEW' I don't understand how any company can own since mysql code is GPL. On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 11:48 AM, mos mo...@fastmail.fm wrote: At 07:13 PM 4/21/2009, you wrote: It will great if the MYSQL guys were to buy mysql from Oracle for half the price that Sun paid. Yeah, I'm sure Widenous is writing a check as we speak. rofl He is busy working on Maria, a stripped down branch of MySQL. http://monty-says.blogspot.com/2008/01/maria-engine-is-released.html They would come out making lots of money and back controlling their own destiny. Anyone can have control of the MySQL code because it is GPL. The only thing stopping them is time and $$$ to organize another company, maybe call it MySQL CD?? Mike :-) On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 4:47 PM, Arthur Fuller fuller.art...@gmail.com wrote: I hereby bet the farm that this shall not occur. I have $10 to say that this shall not occur. a) Who is going to challenge the deal? b) What possible purpose would it serve to interr MySQL? c) Assuming there is some reason for b) above, why incur the wrath of the MySQL community and their possible bail-outs? Nothing gained and everything lost, in such a move. d) If we know anything, we know that Scott and Larry are not fools. e) In the grand scheme of things, the MySQL piece of this pie is peanuts and perhaps less. This acquisition is about the big picture (hardware platform + existing Sparc base + Java, etc.). MySQL, as much as we love it, is a tiny teensy part of this acquisition, and my guess is that Scott and Larry are much more focussed on the other parts (e.g. end-to-end solutions extending from the hardware to the middleware to the Oracle apps, etc.) and in this ballpark MySQL is an interesting tidbit but not at all the focus of their efforts. Think big, baby. MySQL in this context is a tiny little ripple in the pond, having little or nothing to do with Scott/Larry's plans. Viewed from this perspective, MySQL becomes a viable alternative to such offerings as SQL Express from MS. If for no other reasons than marketing imperatives, I am confident that Scott and Larry will choose not to kill MySQL but rather regard it as both an entry platform and a position from which to upgrade to Oracle. Make no mistake about this. There are very sound reasons to upgrade to Oracle. Cost is of course a serious issue. But Oracle can do things, and has various top-end vehicles, that MySQL cannot approach. Consider, to take just one example, Trusted Oracle, upon which numerous banks bet their bottom dollar. Add to this the numerous Oracle Apps. I am no champion of Oracle in particular, but I do rtheecognize what platforms X and Y can do. If the game is defined as retrieval amongst several GB of data, then MySQL has a chance. If the game is retrieval amongst several PB of data, with security, then I bet on Oracle. Granted, this move requires a team of DBAs etc., but if you are dealing with PetaBytes then I suggest that you think carefully about which vendor is prepared to take you there. Just my $0.02 in this debate. I don't see MySQL and Oracle as competitive products. In fact I see the opposite: Oracle gets to occupy a space in the open-source community while simultanwously offering an upgrade path to multi-petabyte solutions, serious security, and so on. I don't think that Scott and Larry are out to hurt the MySQL community, and I'm prepared to bet that they will invest in the next version of MySQL, You might disagree but I challenge you to answer Why? Sheer rapaciousness? That doesn't make sense. MySQL has garnered numerous big-time players, and in what possible interest would Oracle jeapordize these investments? As several writers on this thread have said, if Oracle muddies the waters then they are prepared to move to PostGres and/or several other alternatives, not least to take the MySQL sources to a new playpen. It is clearly not in the interests of Oracle to let this happen. Far more interesting is to fold the MySQL project into Oracle's overall Linux project. Continue to offer MySQL for free, work on transport vehicles that let MySQL people migrate effortlessly to Oracle, etc. I don't mean to pretend to read Scott and Larry's minds here. But I think that the MySQL part of this acquisition, while interesting, is a small part of the rationale for buying Sun. The serious interest is in acquiring an end-to-end solution, as yet offered by nobody, including IBM and MS. This is the most significant part of this acquisition. Imagine being the salesperson of said stack. We have the hardware and the operating system and the middleware and the front-end. Click and go. IMO this is a truly formidable argument. In practice, it could be delivered
I thin'k MySQL will be the 'Oracle Personal Edition'
The main question is: Will Oracle permits a cheaper DB in his portfolio with almost the same reliability than his main and expensive DB? Ok. MySQL is the main database in a wide 'open source' community. That people never will bought Oracle to build a phpBB forum or to install Joomla, but what happen with Flirk, Amazon.com, Digg, CNET, Craiglist, Nokia, Wordpress, Wikipedia, YouTube, FaceBook, ... and other 'big fishs'? Will they invited to buy Oracle? Most of the end medium-small firms uses MySQL because know that successful cases and they rely on MySQL. But what happens if those 'big fishs' abandon MySQL and migrates to Oracle? Will the actual rely in a enterprise environment maintains? I'm sure that Oracle won't abandon MySQL, but will use this influence to invite to that big end users to migrate to Oracle. I suppose that will made them an offer they can't refuse. First reducing the actual rate of patches, slowing the developing of the connectors (.NET connector, ODBC, J/Connector) and in a prudential time offering Oracle to a ridiculous part of this prize and supporting them in the migration with a huge quantity of hours in experts. But only to that 'big fishs'. When there's no 'big fish' in the MySQL ocean, the CEOs in the small-medium enterprise will think No big project is using MySQL. I have doubts and fear about using MySQL in my enterprise. I'll call to Oracle to paid a huge quantity of money and all my doubts and fears will disappears. And I think, the same strategy will use them with Glass Fish (http://java.sun.com/javaee/community/glassfish/). Oracle has 2 JAVA EE application servers: OAS (will be deprecated in short) and Weblogic. I think in a few years MySQL will be only the database for phpBB and Joomla and in 5 years MySQL will replace to Oracle Personal Edition. -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/mysql?unsub=arch...@jab.org
Re: I thin'k MySQL will be the 'Oracle Personal Edition'
José I. Merino schrieb: The main question is: Will Oracle permits a cheaper DB in his portfolio with almost the same reliability than his main and expensive DB? It already has, it's called Oracle Express Edition. Ciao, Thomas -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/mysql?unsub=arch...@jab.org
Re: I thin'k MySQL will be the 'Oracle Personal Edition'
The revenue that MySQL has accrued to date comes (obviously) from the support contracts. Oracle has no interest in derailing this revenue stream. It may well slow down the version cycle, which may be a good thing, but that aside, I cannot see Oracle killing the MySQL stream. There's no argument that I can see in favor of it, and abundant arguments against. Why kill a revenue stream unless you're some sort of neo-Marxist? The large players all buy support contracts and that's the revenue stream. Why kill that? A.
Re: I thin'k MySQL will be the 'Oracle Personal Edition'
XE store up to 4GB of user data, use up to 1GB of memory, and use one CPU on the host machine. On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 3:51 PM, Thomas Pundt mli...@rp-online.de wrote: José I. Merino schrieb: The main question is: Will Oracle permits a cheaper DB in his portfolio with almost the same reliability than his main and expensive DB? It already has, it's called Oracle Express Edition. Ciao, Thomas -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/mysql?unsub=franks1...@gmail.com -- - Lin Chun
Re: Oracle , what else ?
On Tue, 2009-04-21 at 15:19 +0200, Martijn Tonies wrote: Hey Gilles, After MySQL bought by the java maker, and now Sun bought by Oracle, what are we gonna run as RDBMS ? How about PostgreSQL? Joshua D. Drake -- PostgreSQL - XMPP: jdr...@jabber.postgresql.org Consulting, Development, Support, Training 503-667-4564 - http://www.commandprompt.com/ The PostgreSQL Company, serving since 1997 -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/mysql?unsub=arch...@jab.org
Re: Sun bought by Oracle
Waiting for more interesting points. On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 1:42 PM, Manish Gupta manish.in@gmail.comwrote: http://www.sun.com/third-party/global/oracle/ anyone saw this ?? On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 2:54 AM, John Meyer john.l.me...@gmail.com wrote: Yep. In particular the anti-trust division of the DOJ. Kaushal Shriyan wrote: On Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 11:14 PM, John Meyer john.l.me...@gmail.com mailto:john.l.me...@gmail.com wrote: I'm wondering what the DOJ is going to think of that deal. -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql?unsub=kaushalshri...@gmail.com DOJ ? does it mean Department of Justice ? Kaushal -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql?unsub=manish.in@gmail.com -- Manish Gupta Follow me on twitter: twitter.com/nimbus3000 -- I'm a MySQL DBA in china. More about me just visit here: http://yueliangdao0608.cublog.cn
Oracle , what else ?
hello people, bad joke is not it ? After MySQL bought by the java maker, and now Sun bought by Oracle, what are we gonna run as RDBMS ? _-¯-_-¯-_-¯-_-¯-_ Gilles Missonnier IAP - g...@iap.fr 01 44 32 81 36 -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/mysql?unsub=arch...@jab.org
Re: Oracle , what else ?
On 21 Apr 2009, at 14:06, Gilles MISSONNIER wrote: hello people, bad joke is not it ? After MySQL bought by the java maker, and now Sun bought by Oracle, what are we gonna run as RDBMS ? I don't see what the problem is really. Anyway if there ever is a problem in the future (which I doubt) there is always PostgreSQL to fall back on. Simon. smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
