Reading this slashdot article today and two CIO magazine articles linked from it.
Such discussions started at right place at right time always attract a lot of flamers and can be fun to read.
What hit me this time is quality of the articles in CIO magazine. If this is what managers suppose to use to make their “informed” decisions about products, not a big surprise huge portion of IT budgets are wasted. It looks like someone who has not got a clue is writing for someone who does not even pretend. I see zero “meat” – mostly using of marketing materials. This applies both to pro-MySQL and against-MySQL articles.
The funniest argument for me was the age of the product. Where does this “older is better” comes from ? Oh yes I know, it comes from the point of view market old timers try to show the value of their technology to their customers and shareholders.
In reality however most of 30 year code would ether have to be scrapped and rewritten or it would become passive being hard to maintain and extend. Over time systems tend to get entropy it is as true as people aging as they are getting older. You can postpone things by healthy coding techniques as you can do by healthy living but you can’t stop the process completely.
Take a look at MaxDB for example, which has extremely old code base (with a lot written in pascal).
Indeed you can apply age argument to the code which is few months/couple of years old – indeed this may be not battle tested enough or just too dynamic in development (nothing stops you from starting to actively break old code though). Indeed there are some problems which may happen only once or twice a year in production but 10 years is enough by far.
As old time MySQL User I should say MySQL stability have not much improved (really going up and down) since MySQL 4.0. This even applies to Innodb tables which were already on par with general MySQL level of stability in MySQL 4.0
But now get back to the question of using MySQL.
I’m obviously biased and focused more on Web applications rather than Enterprise applications (though these are merging a lot these days). From my standpoint the question is when or how to use MySQL not just if it should be used or not.
There are many applications when MySQL works great, when there are some of applications when MySQL can be made to work and there are finally cases when MySQL limitations are not worth the trouble – would require too complex application changes or some other ugly workarounds.
In very many cases the problem of MySQL use is not problem of the product but problem of state of mind – you just develop applications for Oracle and MySQL differently and if you’re try to apply same patterns to MySQL as you used for Oracle or move existing applications without changes you may well run into trouble. PostgreSQL is probably closer to Oracle in this state of mind thing.
It is interesting one of mentioned reasons to use MySQL was MySQL simplicity and I’m afraid this is what is gradually leaving us.
MySQL 4.0 was indeed simple – you could not do anything complicated with it and you could get to know pretty much all features within rather short time. MySQL 5.0 with spice of enterprise features is far from being simple and MySQL 5.1+ with wide choice of storage engines are getting even more complicated.
It is true so far it is different degree of complexity than many other DBMS but it is increasing.
On the other hand many successful MySQL users would use few new technologies besides Stock MySQL 4.0 toolset. For example Google still has a lot of stuff on MySQL 4.0… looking at the patches they designed themselves such as Semi-synchronous replication, advanced Monitoring and scaling features some users need other features than MySQL adding in newer MySQL releases.
In other cases I can see people using for example SubQueries and Partitions and information schema for ease of management but rarely I would see large amount of big post MySQL 4 features used at the same time.
This is of course only technical side. There are obviously a lot of other factors but they are more obvious.
For Web shops and for most of enterprises you can use MySQL for free same as Linux. You do not have to pay for licenses and all
unless you want some extra services. You can use Community version and solve things yourself or use third party support, which indeed works as MySQL is OpenSource and nothing stops you from fixing bugs yourself or adding your own features. Again it is very similar as Linux – if you do not want to pay for RHEL you can use CentOS, Fedora or Debian,Ubuntu.
Most articles speaking about MySQL for Enterprises speaking about MySQL with full pack of services from MySQL AB. Obviously this is how MySQL AB wants its product to be seen so whomever uses MySQL buys services but it is important to understand this is not really required. Of course many enterprises may need that because of their internal policies and state of mind, but this may not have yet adapted to open source software world, at least when it comes to the classic enterprises.
Having said that I’m not advocating against buying services from MySQL. They indeed may be more efficient for you than having your own tool set and DBAs which can resolve all MySQL issues with help of Google rather than MySQL Support Team. You also may want to buy some services from MySQL simply so MySQL Development is continued. My point is simply you do not have to do if you do not have money for it or if you do not need them.
So this is fun articles and discussion to read and it brings up many thoughts but I better stop right here and go back to real work