Just to make things interesting... ;-)
Not a technical support thread: it's industry speculation sparked by a 2009 report that IBM might buy Sun. Participants debate what would happen to MySQL under IBM, whether Oracle would counter-bid, and regulatory hurdles. Points raised include MySQL's mutex/multi-core scalability problems, Oracle's ownership of InnoDB, departures of the original MySQL team and likely forks, and speculation about IDS as a MySQL storage engine or being open-sourced. Pure opinion, no problem solved or resolution recorded.
Auto-generated by DrWatson from the posts below — may be imperfect; read the full thread.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/03/18/ibm_buying_sun/ Now I wonder what will happen to mySQL? ;-) Anyway I'd wager that the FTC will put a snag in this, however, it would be interesting to see if Oracle steps up to the plate and makes a bid. _________________________________________________________________ Windows Live™: Life without walls. http://windowslive.com/explore?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_allup_1a_explore_032009
> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/03/18/ibm_buying_sun/ > > Now I wonder what will happen to mySQL? ;-) > > Anyway I'd wager that the FTC will put a snag in this, however, it would > be interesting to see if Oracle steps up to the plate and makes a bid. For Sun ? Why ?
On Mar 19, 4:06 am, Ian Michael Gumby <im_gu...@hotmail.com> wrote: > http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/03/18/ibm_buying_sun/ > > Now I wonder what will happen to mySQL? ;-) > > Anyway I'd wager that the FTC will put a snag in this, however, it would be interesting to see if Oracle steps up to the plate and makes a bid. > > _________________________________________________________________ > Windows Live™: Life without walls.http://windowslive.com/explore?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_allup_1a_explore_032009 Dang, you beat me to it. Is it possible to use a more cryptic topic heading though.
Mark, If you have to ask, I wonder just how much of a competitive wonk you are? ;-) Seriously if Oracle isn't mulling a counter offer, then I think someone is definitely asleep at the switch. -G > Date: Wed, 18 Mar 2009 19:59:32 -0700 > From: markbtownsend@sbcglobal.net > To: im_gumby@hotmail.com > CC: informix-list@iiug.org > Subject: Re: Just to make things interesting... ;-) > > > > http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/03/18/ibm_buying_sun/ > > > > Now I wonder what will happen to mySQL? ;-) > > > > Anyway I'd wager that the FTC will put a snag in this, however, it would > > be interesting to see if Oracle steps up to the plate and makes a bid. > > > For Sun ? Why ? > _________________________________________________________________ Windows Live™ Contacts: Organize your contact list. http://windowslive.com/connect/post/marcusatmicrosoft.spaces.live.com-Blog-cns!503D1D86EBB2B53C!2285.entry?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_UGC_Contacts_032009
Cryptic? Maybe. The interesting thing is that it makes sense overall for IBM to buy Sun. At 6.5 Billion, the time to ROI isn't that long. It will depend on how well IBM can gain traction in to the 'white space'. You can bet that there's going to be a lot of mySQL customers who are getting worried. Can you say 'True Up' ? ;-) Of course, this makes Ambush and Jerry Keesee's jobs a bit more interesting. Assuming that the deal goes through. IBM is having a hard enough time with two database engines that overlap. Toss mySQL in to the mix and you'll have a bigger set of issues. Sun paid a billion so you can't toss it back to OpenSource and license it under Apache. Well, ok, you can, but then you'll have a tricky time going forward. You'd have to split the code stream and maintain a 'free' version and then a supported version with all of the nice bells and whistles. It can be done, but it could mean some major mods. Is there enough license revenue or potential license revenue to make this worth while? Like I said, if the WSJ article is true, things will get interersting. ;-) -G > From: peterpain@gmail.com > Subject: Re: Just to make things interesting... ;-) > Date: Wed, 18 Mar 2009 20:23:13 -0700 > To: informix-list@iiug.org > > On Mar 19, 4:06 am, Ian Michael Gumby <im_gu...@hotmail.com> wrote: > > http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/03/18/ibm_buying_sun/ > > > > Now I wonder what will happen to mySQL? ;-) > > > > Anyway I'd wager that the FTC will put a snag in this, however, it would be interesting to see if Oracle steps up to the plate and makes a bid. > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > Windows Live™: Life without walls.http://windowslive.com/explore?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_allup_1a_explore_032009 > > Dang, you beat me to it. Is it possible to use a more cryptic topic > heading though. > _______________________________________________ > Informix-list mailing list > Informix-list@iiug.org > http://www.iiug.org/mailman/listinfo/informix-list _________________________________________________________________ Windows Live™ Groups: Create an online spot for your favorite groups to meet. http://windowslive.com/online/groups?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_groups_032009
> IBM is having a hard enough time with two database engines that overlap. > Toss mySQL in to the mix and you'll have a bigger set of issues. Sun > paid a billion so you can't toss it back to OpenSource and license it > under Apache. Well, ok, you can, but then you'll have a tricky time > going forward. You'd have to split the code stream and maintain a 'free' > version and then a supported version with all of the nice bells and > whistles. It can be done, but it could mean some major mods. Is there > enough license revenue or potential license revenue to make this worth > while? > IBM will be buying a huge problem with MySQL. Sun discovered recently that MySQL does not scale well on their new multi-core hardware. Similarly Intel. I suspect the same for IBM PSeries. They have huge mutex issues that will require a consistent rewrite of the engine. The only engine that is scaling well under MySQL is InnoDB, and Oracle own's that In the one year since the purchase, the stock price of Sun had plummeted so that the $1 billion paid for MySQL equaled a 1/3 of Sun's total market cap. Maybe for the above reason, one year after the purchase, all of the original MySQL management team has left to set up companies that will fork MySQL and start to work on the performance issues. Many of the developers have also left. So MySQL will become heavily forked. If IBM does get MySQL, and are committed to it, then I predict the next storage engine under MySQL will be IDS, similar to how IBM worked to put MySQL on top of the older AS/400 legacy data store. It would be interesting to see if they think about Open Sourcing IDS at the same time. All of these are my own personal opinions, and should be construed and portrayed as such. They are not representative of Oracle's view
And this is why I used the subject title of 'just to make things interesting'. I agree with Mark that mySQL is going to be a tough pill to swallow. Of course Mark is correct on the scalability issue and that Oracle owns InnoDB. So yes, a rewrite would have to happen along with maybe putting it on SE instead of IDS. I make this distinction because there is a niche of customers who want something that is light and simple to use. Essentially drop the database server on a machine in a file system / directory and let it run. Much easier than IDS,Oracle and DB2. mySQL could fit that space, however, again there would have to be an investment of sorts. IBM won't do it unless they can show the ROI and a reasonable timeframe to hit it. With respect to scalability, its relative. While we talk of scalability, it may mean something different to others. Also scalability may be a moot point for a lot of the applications out there. Take Sears for example. They can switch from IDS to mySQL in their POS store systems databases. There you don't have to worry about scalability. You have a finite number of POS stations, a finite number of skus, and a finite number of TPS based on customer purchases. The only day that I'd be scared of is Black Friday. Even then, you still have a relatively low number of TPS. So mySQL is a dangerous inigma to IBM. Its got mindshare and is 'good enough' for a lot of applications. If the deal happens, it will get finalized by June and probably win approval from the FTC and EU organizations to go forward by end of Q3. That means Jan 1, 2010 it would be a new life for Sun folks. IDS going Open Source? Not going to happen. MySQL is a bit of an enigma and of course, there's also JavaDB. (Wow. I guess those Cloudscape folks might have some job security after all.... :-) With respect to Rock, the front runner of RDBMSs is going to be IDS. Now if only Sun/Netbeans had better support for IDS in a Netbeans, glassfish combo.... > Date: Thu, 19 Mar 2009 08:10:42 -0700 > From: markbtownsend@sbcglobal.net > To: im_gumby@hotmail.com > CC: peterpain@gmail.com; informix-list@iiug.org > Subject: Re: Just to make things interesting... ;-) > > > > IBM is having a hard enough time with two database engines that overlap. > > Toss mySQL in to the mix and you'll have a bigger set of issues. Sun > > paid a billion so you can't toss it back to OpenSource and license it > > under Apache. Well, ok, you can, but then you'll have a tricky time > > going forward. You'd have to split the code stream and maintain a 'free' > > version and then a supported version with all of the nice bells and > > whistles. It can be done, but it could mean some major mods. Is there > > enough license revenue or potential license revenue to make this worth > > while? > > > > IBM will be buying a huge problem with MySQL. > > Sun discovered recently that MySQL does not scale well on their new > multi-core hardware. Similarly Intel. I suspect the same for IBM > PSeries. They have huge mutex issues that will require a consistent > rewrite of the engine. The only engine that is scaling well under MySQL > is InnoDB, and Oracle own's that > > In the one year since the purchase, the stock price of Sun had plummeted > so that the $1 billion paid for MySQL equaled a 1/3 of Sun's total > market cap. > > Maybe for the above reason, one year after the purchase, all of the > original MySQL management team has left to set up companies that will > fork MySQL and start to work on the performance issues. Many of the > developers have also left. So MySQL will become heavily forked. > > If IBM does get MySQL, and are committed to it, then I predict the next > storage engine under MySQL will be IDS, similar to how IBM worked to put > MySQL on top of the older AS/400 legacy data store. It would be > interesting to see if they think about Open Sourcing IDS at the same time. > > All of these are my own personal opinions, and should be construed and > portrayed as such. They are not representative of Oracle's view > _________________________________________________________________ Windows Live™ Contacts: Organize your contact list. http://windowslive.com/connect/post/marcusatmicrosoft.spaces.live.com-Blog-cns!503D1D86EBB2B53C!2285.entry?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_UGC_Contacts_032009