We want the MySQL server to be: - The best and the most used database in the world
It is surely one of the most used databases, and MySQL was evolving into a database with more reasonable features with each version, so why do you do some kind of "restart" by using SAP DB?
MySQL is a combination of a management layer and various storage engines. The management layer provides a uniform interface to the various storage engines, while the storage engines provide the bulk of the actual functionality.
Integrating SAPDB as a strorage-layer sounds like a good idea, but it also sounds like there will not be much of SAPDB left (which is a bad idea).
Will there still be the feature- and config-richness that we are used to?
SAPDB has some advantages over MySQL. For example you can communicate with the database using the DBMGUI, altough the Database isn't started - or not really started (admin-mode).
So you can repair tables, set params etc....
all without shutting down the whole DB-Server.
Integration of SAP DB as a storage engine will not have us "restart" - instead it will be like the integration of InnoDB and BerkeleyDB as storage engines. These were both cases where we provided our users with additional functionality that they could easily start using due to the shared parts of the management layer.
InnoDB and BerkeleyDB are used as real storage engines by MySQL - i would call them a "file-format", but SAPDB is more like a concept for a whole DB. So which parts are you going to port, which not?
Perhaps you should think about porting the Network-Layer of SAPDB (called x-server) to be abled to have multiple DB-instances on one host
with different kernel-versions each.
This also includes the ability, to start/stop/config a DB while is isn't even started.
- Free from bugs
Are you kidding? No Software is Bug Free (except for TeX ;-) ).
Again, another goal. Focusing on being mostly bug-free would be pretty lame! :) Of course, we would never aspire to be as exalted as any program written by Donald Knuth! :)
The point is, that even Knuth can't write bug-free software, because he is "only human". (unfortunately these bugs haven't been found yet)
In the last few days, valid concerns have been raised about the possible negative effects of the agreement between SAP and MySQL. Over the next few weeks, we will be working on addressing these concerns.
Imagine, you would want to buy a car. This car is build by a company, that is knows for buidling good cars, and now you hear, that this car won't be available again, but there is a successor which is build by a company that is known for building much simpler cars.
Would you buy that new car? I guess not.
That is only part of the picture. SAP's core business is ERP systems. Our core business is databases. We focus only on our databases and database related issues - we are better organized to provide support for database users.
MySQL certainly has an image in the DB community. The ones searching for full-featured (enterprise) DB were always disappointed.
If your concern is that we are not up to the task technically, we have an excellent team - and this team will be working with the SAP DB team.
Our doubt result from the image MySQL has - so you have to proove that you can stand that task, and that the result is a DB comparable to SAPDB. But after all you said, i fear that too many features/concepts are consired to be unimportant.
In many ways you get the best of both worlds.
hopefully
_______________________________________________ sapdb.general mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://listserv.sap.com/mailman/listinfo/sapdb.general
