Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Submission + - Oracle backs out of the MySQL Conference (oracle.com) 1

An anonymous reader writes: Along side its move to to scuttle OpenSolaris, remove itself from the Open Office foundation, sue Google over its use of Java, Oracle has now removed itself from the MySQL Conference and is now pushing MySQL users to attend its own user group conference that it funds that has been placed on the same week as the O'Reilly conference. Is there any evidence left that Oracle has nothing but hostile intentions toward open source at this point?

Submission + - PostgreSQL 9.0 Released (postgresql.org) 1

poet writes: Today the PostgreSQL Global Development Group (PGDG) released PostgreSQL 9.0. This release marks a major milestone in the PostgreSQL ecosystem with added features such as streaming replication (including DDL), Hot Standby and other nifty items such as DO. Get your copy today.

Comment Re:Choices (Score 1) 702

And with Net Neutrality, if you don't get good government-regulated service... what?

Or are you pretty confident that the FCC will handle regulating the Internet as well as they do, say, terrestrial radio and broadcast TV?

Submission + - Marten Mickos hints at a closed source Eucalyptus (networkworld.com)

An anonymous reader writes: In a Network World article, Marten Mickos, former CEO of MySQL, talks about his opinions on a future open core world. His previous attempts at close sourcing open source software ended up with Sun pulling the plug on his plans. In the article he states his opinion that in order to derive revenue from open source, that some piece of it must be closed source. He mentioning that Eucalyptus is headed this way. Does this point to Ubuntu Cloud being eventually crippled in order to drive revenue back to his company?

Comment Re:It's still basically MySQL. (Score 1) 41

Hi!

MySQL "materializes" a view, but yes it does not have "Materialized Views".

For some views you can do a simple substitution, but not in all cases (for instance, SELECT * FROM A GROUP BY()). In that case you need the end result before you can execute the query.

I had little to do with the VIEW implementation, so I can't really say much about how it was designed. I am not crazy about how it works either.

Cheers,
      -Brian

Comment Re:It's still basically MySQL. (Score 1) 41

Hi!

I am not sure about the Windows version, but I know the Unix version is still process based. In my opinion, one of the principle advantages in this is that they can use functions which can leak/die/etc and not have to worry about it taking out the server. This is what allowed Apache to handle so many unstable languages/modules.

The problem with Views in MySQL is that they frequently materialized, aka in many queries the database chooses to generate a full table of the data and do the JOIN (and in some queries there is no way to get around that). Many other databases have had views for longer and can avoid materialization in a lot of cases.

Currently I haven't brought VIEWs back in at a user level. The closest thing we have in Drizzle we use table functions for our data dictionary (aka... information_schema) and we do not materialize there. MySQL does materialization when you look at those tables.

My goal is to bring back VIEW, but for the first generation of them avoid queries which would cause/require materialization.

Cheers,
      -Brian

Comment Re:It's still basically MySQL. (Score 5, Informative) 41

Hi!

Drizzle is transactional by default.

Bad data? We don't insert it, we toss an error (and if we don't in some cases, it is a bug).

We purposely went after the issues in the MySQL gotchas list when we began (http://sql-info.de/mysql/).

Our DDL? Soon will be transactional. Our data dictionary is federated out to engines, so unlike MySQL in our system the engine owns the definition so you can't end up in a situation where the engine is off from the definition.

I wouldn't make the assumption that because we have a similar ancestor that we are the same at all. It would be like assuming Postgres and Ingres are the same (which they are most certainly not).

When I first started doing the rewrite I considered Postgres (and spoke to a number of the developers of it at the time). In the first year I went back and forth in my head on that decision. There would have been a lot of things that would have made PG a better starting point. By the time we reached 5.1 the MySQL codebase was junk. Postgres would have made for a good decision but there were three drawbacks.

1) Postgres is C and not C++. I find that I can write code in C++ nowadays much faster then I can in C (and it comes out just as fast, the C++ "is slow" is an archaic view).

2) Postgres is not designed to use threads. I prefer to work with threads over processes (and there is a lot of good and bad with both concepts).

3) Sun wouldn't have paid for it ;)

I wouldn't consider SQLite. It is neither type safe, not concurrent. It is a great database, but it doesn't solve any of my needs. I did think about Firebird for a bit, but while I know the MySQL and Postgres codebase, I don't know the Firebird code at all.

Cheers,
      -Brian

Comment Re:Dutch Auction (Score 2, Interesting) 574

I doubt that most of the "scalped" tickets are actually sold by scalpers. Most are probably sold by friends and employees of the event and/or venue.

Think about it--before tickets go on sale, roadies and janitors get a chance to buy premium seats at face value, maybe even with an employee discount. The performers don't care, the venue doesn't have to pay employment taxes on this unofficial employee benefit, and the employee gets some extra cash.

Slashdot Top Deals

"Experience has proved that some people indeed know everything." -- Russell Baker

Working...