On 11/09/2010 06:01 PM, Andy wrote:
MySQL is GPL'd, just like Linux is.
Well it is and it isn't. A couple of years ago when I was involved with
choosing DB for a (proprietary) application we could not figure MySQLs
license out. It was GPL'd but at the same time if you wanted to use it
Lincoln Yeoh wrote:
What's more important to such companies is the ability to scale over
multiple machines.
That question - how much work it is to administer thousands of database
servers - seems to have been largely missing from this conversation.
Apparently back in 2008, Facebook had 1800
On Sun, Nov 14, 2010 at 12:15 PM, Ron Mayer
rm...@cheapcomplexdevices.comwrote:
Lincoln Yeoh wrote:
What's more important to such companies is the ability to scale over
multiple machines.
That question - how much work it is to administer thousands of database
servers - seems to have been
On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 1:36 PM, Sandeep Srinivasa s...@clearsenses.comwrote:
On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 11:46 PM, David Boreham david_l...@boreham.orgwrote:
Hmm...typically multi-core scaling issues are in the area of memory
contention and cache coherence (and therefore are for the most part
On Mon, Nov 8, 2010 at 11:24 PM, Sandeep Srinivasa s...@clearsenses.com wrote:
There was an interesting post today on highscalability
- http://highscalability.com/blog/2010/11/4/facebook-at-13-million-queries-per-second-recommends-minimiz.html
The discussion/comments touched upon why mysql is a
On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 3:50 PM, Merlin Moncure mmonc...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Nov 8, 2010 at 11:24 PM, Sandeep Srinivasa s...@clearsenses.com
wrote:
There was an interesting post today on highscalability
-
On Nov 9, 2010, at 7:04 AM, Allan Kamau wrote:
have come up with a few
(possibly wrong) theories.
They all sound reasonable. I think you missed an important one though:
aggressive (and even sometimes outright false) promotion and sales by the
company MySQL AB.
Why I started looking at
On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 10:26 AM, Scott Ribe scott_r...@killerbytes.com wrote:
Also, my understanding is that if you go way back on the PostgreSQL timeline
to versions 6 and earliest 7.x, it was a little shaky. (I started with 7.3 or
7.4, and it has been rock solid.)
In those same times,
Vick Khera vi...@khera.org writes:
On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 10:26 AM, Scott Ribe scott_r...@killerbytes.com
wrote:
Also, my understanding is that if you go way back on the PostgreSQL timeline
to versions 6 and earliest 7.x, it was a little shaky. (I started with 7.3
or 7.4, and it has been
Hey all,
IMO that they choiced MySQL because of no knowledge
about PostgreSQL and about valid database designs.
Just garbage of data for SELECTing with minimal efforts
on data integrity and database server programming (ala
typical PHP project).
Sorry :-)
2010/11/9 Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us
2010/11/9 Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us:
Vick Khera vi...@khera.org writes:
On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 10:26 AM, Scott Ribe scott_r...@killerbytes.com
wrote:
Also, my understanding is that if you go way back on the PostgreSQL
timeline to versions 6 and earliest 7.x, it was a little shaky. (I
On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 10:54 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Vick Khera vi...@khera.org writes:
On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 10:26 AM, Scott Ribe scott_r...@killerbytes.com
wrote:
Also, my understanding is that if you go way back on the PostgreSQL
timeline to versions 6 and earliest 7.x,
--- On Tue, 11/9/10, Gauthier, Dave dave.gauth...@intel.com wrote:
A different slant on this has to do with licensing and $$.
Might Oracle decide some day to start charging for their new
found DB? They are a for-profit company that's
beholding to their shareholders LONG before an open
Think upgrades
-Original Message-
From: Andy [mailto:angelf...@yahoo.com]
Sent: Tuesday, November 09, 2010 12:02 PM
To: pgsql-general@postgresql.org; Gauthier, Dave
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Why facebook used mysql ?
--- On Tue, 11/9/10, Gauthier, Dave dave.gauth...@intel.com wrote
On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 10:00 AM, Merlin Moncure mmonc...@gmail.com wrote:
Postgres 7.2 brought non blocking vacuum. Before that, you could
pretty much write off any 24x7 duty applications -- dealing with dead
tuples was just too much of a headache.
Amen! I remember watching vacuum run
kamaual...@gmail.com (Allan Kamau) writes:
I agree with Merlin, There is a surprising big number of good
technology companies (including Google) out there using MySQL. For
sometime I have been wondering why and have come up with a few
(possibly wrong) theories. Such as: these companies are
On 09 Nov 2010, at 7:16 PM, Gauthier, Dave wrote:
Think upgrades
This is covered by the GPL license. Once you have released code under
the GPL, all derivative code - ie upgrades - have to also be released
in source form, under the GPL license.
Regards,
Graham
--
--
Sent via
dave.gauth...@intel.com wrote:
From: Gauthier, Dave dave.gauth...@intel.com
Subject: RE: [GENERAL] Why facebook used mysql ?
To: Andy angelf...@yahoo.com, pgsql-general@postgresql.org
pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Date: Tuesday, November 9, 2010, 12:16 PM
Think upgrades
-Original Message
On 11/9/2010 10:27 AM, Graham Leggett wrote:
This is covered by the GPL license. Once you have released code under
the GPL, all derivative code - ie upgrades - have to also be released
in source form, under the GPL license.
Sorry but this is 100% not true. It may be true for a 3rd party
On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 9:28 AM, Andy angelf...@yahoo.com wrote:
Any upgrades that are based on the MySQL source code will be legally required
to be released under GPL too.
That's the beauty of GPL.
Upgrades released by Oracle *do not* have be under GPL. They own all
the IP, and can release
In addition to the license a product is currently available under,
you need to also consider who owns its copyright; who owns
its test suite (which may not be open source at all); who
employs all the people who understand the code and who owns
the trademarks that identify the product.
Red Hat
On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 10:28 AM, Andy angelf...@yahoo.com wrote:
Any upgrades that are based on the MySQL source code will be legally required
to be released under GPL too.
That's the beauty of GPL.
This isn't entirely true. Oracle owns all copyrights to mysql source
code. they can release
...@pgadmin.org wrote:
From: Dave Page dp...@pgadmin.org
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Why facebook used mysql ?
To: Andy angelf...@yahoo.com
Cc: pgsql-general@postgresql.org pgsql-general@postgresql.org,
DaveGauthier dave.gauth...@intel.com
Date: Tuesday, November 9, 2010, 12:31 PM
On Tue, Nov 9, 2010
At 12:24 PM 11/9/2010, Sandeep Srinivasa wrote:
There was an interesting post today on highscalability -
On 11/9/2010 10:45 AM, Andy wrote:
As a condition of getting European Commission's approval of its acquisition of
Sun/MySQL, Oracle had to agree to continue the GPL release.
In case anyone is interested in what specifically Oracle agreed to do,
this is the text
from the decision (they agreed
On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 5:45 PM, Andy angelf...@yahoo.com wrote:
Not true.
As a condition of getting European Commission's approval of its acquisition
of Sun/MySQL, Oracle had to agree to continue the GPL release.
And there are non-Oracle upgrades from Google, facebook, Percona, etc. So no
David Boreham david_l...@boreham.org writes:
In addition to the license a product is currently available under,
you need to also consider who owns its copyright; who owns
its test suite (which may not be open source at all); who
employs all the people who understand the code and who owns
the
hi,
I am the OP.
With due respect to everyone (and sincere apologies to Richard Broersma), my
intention was not to create a thread about MySQL/Oracle's business
practices.
It was about the technical discussion on Highscalability - I have been
trying to wrap my head around the concept of
On 11/9/2010 11:10 AM, Sandeep Srinivasa wrote:
It was about the technical discussion on Highscalability - I have been
trying to wrap my head around the concept of multiple core scaling for
Postgres, especially beyond 8 core (like Scott's Magny Coeurs
example). My doubt arises from whether
On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 11:46 PM, David Boreham david_l...@boreham.orgwrote:
Hmm...typically multi-core scaling issues are in the area of memory
contention and cache coherence (and therefore are for the most part not
dependent on the OS and its scheduler).
If it is independent of the OS,
On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 11:10 AM, Sandeep Srinivasa s...@clearsenses.com wrote:
hi,
I am the OP.
With due respect to everyone (and sincere apologies to Richard Broersma), my
intention was not to create a thread about MySQL/Oracle's business
practices.
Hehe, we head off on tangents. It's
-Original Message-
From: pgsql-general-ow...@postgresql.org
[mailto:pgsql-general-ow...@postgresql.org] On Behalf Of Tom Lane
Sent: Tuesday, November 09, 2010 10:55 AM
To: Vick Khera
Cc: Scott Ribe; Allan Kamau; pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Why facebook used
Also there's the strange and mysterious valley group-think syndrome.
I've seen this with several products/technologies over the years.
I suspect it comes from the VCs, but I'm not sure. The latest example
is you should be using EC2. There always follows a discussion where
I can present 50
On 09 Nov 2010, at 7:30 PM, David Boreham wrote:
Sorry but this is 100% not true. It may be true for a 3rd party (you
release something under the GPL, I enhance it, therefore I am
required to release my enhancement under the GPL). But Oracle owns
the copyright to the MySql code and
On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 1:04 PM, Graham Leggett minf...@sharp.fm wrote:
On 09 Nov 2010, at 7:30 PM, David Boreham wrote:
Sorry but this is 100% not true. It may be true for a 3rd party (you
release something under the GPL, I enhance it, therefore I am required to
release my enhancement under
Scott Marlowe scott.marl...@gmail.com writes:
On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 1:04 PM, Graham Leggett minf...@sharp.fm wrote:
Ownership of the copyright is owned by whoever made the contribution, and
any competent version control system will give you the list of contributions
(and therefore
From: pgsql-general-ow...@postgresql.org
[mailto:pgsql-general-ow...@postgresql.org] On Behalf Of Sandeep Srinivasa
Sent: Tuesday, November 09, 2010 10:10 AM
To: Lincoln Yeoh
Cc: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Why facebook used mysql ?
hi,
I am the OP.
With due respect
On 11/9/2010 11:36 AM, Sandeep Srinivasa wrote:
If it is independent of the OS, then how does one go about tuning it.
Consider this - I get a 12 core server on which I want multiple
webserver instances + DB. Can one create CPU pools (say core 1,2,3 for
webservers, 4,5,6,7 for DB, etc.) ?
I
On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 4:12 PM, David Boreham david_l...@boreham.org wrote:
I don't think you should be looking at process partitioning and core
affinity unless you have already proved that
you have processes that don't scale over the cores you have, to deliver the
throughput you need.
Note
On 11/9/2010 5:05 PM, Scott Marlowe wrote:
Note that you're likely to get FAR more out of processor affinity with
multiple NICs assigned each to its own core / set of cores that share
L3 cache and such.Having the nics and maybe RAID controllers and /
or fibre channel cards etc on their own
There was an interesting post today on highscalability -
http://highscalability.com/blog/2010/11/4/facebook-at-13-million-queries-per-second-recommends-minimiz.html
The discussion/comments touched upon why mysql is a better idea for Facebook
than Postgres. Here's an interesting one
One is that
On Mon, Nov 8, 2010 at 8:24 PM, Sandeep Srinivasa s...@clearsenses.com wrote:
I wonder if anyone can comment on this - especially the part that PG doesnt
scale as well as MySQL on multiple cores ?
Sorry Sandeep, there may be some that love to re-re-re-hash these
these subjects. I myself am
On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 10:31 AM, Richard Broersma
richard.broer...@gmail.com wrote:
The following link contains hundreds of comments that you may be
interested in, some that address issues that are much more interesting
and well established:
On Mon, Nov 8, 2010 at 10:47 PM, Sandeep Srinivasa s...@clearsenses.com wrote:
I did actually try to search for topics on multiple cores vs MySQL, but I
wasnt able to find anything of much use. Elsewhere (on Hacker News for
example), I have indeed come across statements that PG scales better
44 matches
Mail list logo
