<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Michael Dolan Dot Com &#187; MySQL</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.michaeldolan.com/category/vendors/sun/mysql/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.michaeldolan.com</link>
	<description>Linux, Law, Open Source, and a Comedy of Errors</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 02 Aug 2011 18:54:36 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Red Hat makes &#8220;strategic investment&#8221; in EnterpriseDB (backer of Postgres)</title>
		<link>http://www.michaeldolan.com/1449</link>
		<comments>http://www.michaeldolan.com/1449#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 09 Nov 2009 23:14:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>md</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Linux]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[MySQL]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Open Source Software]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Oracle]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Red Hat]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[RHEL]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.michaeldolan.com/?p=1449</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I&#8217;m not quite sure how I missed seeing the news until today, but I just noticed that Red Hat made a &#8220;strategic investment&#8221; in EnterpriseDB &#8211; the company behind PostgreSQL. I think this is a very interesting move. http://www.infoworld.com/d/data-management/red-hat-invests-in-enterprisedb-eye-oracle-and-mysql-855 Many seem to have their concerns or at least questions about Sun+MySQL, but with Oracle in [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m not quite sure how I missed seeing the news until today, but I just noticed that Red Hat made a &#8220;strategic investment&#8221; in EnterpriseDB &#8211; the company behind PostgreSQL. I think this is a very interesting move.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.infoworld.com/d/data-management/red-hat-invests-in-enterprisedb-eye-oracle-and-mysql-855">http://www.infoworld.com/d/data-management/red-hat-invests-in-enterprisedb-eye-oracle-and-mysql-855</a></p>
<p>Many seem to have their concerns or at least questions about Sun+MySQL, but with Oracle in the mix those issues appear to have snowballed into an avalanche. Even the EU has shown its concern. I think a key issue for the Linux community is whether Oracle will create enough impetus to move people away from MySQL&#8217;s technology platform or not enough impetus which will make MySQL clones attractive. It&#8217;s harder to move wholesale to a new database technology than it would be to move to a different open source clone. But then customers (paying ones) get into the issues of support, fidelity, and roadmaps. The all too repetitive issue of forking will inevitably take center stage.</p>
<p>Two thoughts: 1) what does this mean for a community Linux FOSS database solution and 2) why Postgre SQL?</p>
<p><strong>As for question 1)</strong>, at the end of the day, I think a strategic question has to be answered. That is whether a FOSS database is important enough to have maintained by an independent community organization/foundation similar to Apache, Eclipse, Mozilla, etc. Not like CodePlex which is a front for 1 company, but a foundation where multiple companies, invested community members and influencers provide some level of guidance/control. MySQL&#8217;s code could become that base, or it could be Postgre SQL. However, the current situation is no foundation-led free and open source database platform &#8211; which appears at odds with what the community seems to expect out of the &#8220;MySQL poster child&#8221; for a FOSS database. MySQL is a company and should be treated as such (although it remains to be seen how Oracle treats it&#8230;).</p>
<p><strong>As for question 2)</strong>, I think the savvy move by Red Hat is around <a title="postgre plus enterprise db red hat" href="http://www.enterprisedb.com/solutions/tech_case.do" target="_blank">Postgres Plus</a> &#8211; the &#8220;Oracle compatibility&#8221; that EnterpriseDB commercially licenses for a fee. (what does <a title="postgres plus oracle compatibility" href="http://www.enterprisedb.com/learning/videos/Oracle_Compatibility.do" target="_blank">Oracle compatibility mean is answered here</a>) Postgres Plus also allows a customer to migrate Oracle-based applications to use a Postgres database engine that &#8220;looks like&#8221; an Oracle database. Now consider customers constantly complain about Oracle&#8217;s license fee increases and consider that at least 20% of any customers Oracle environment is &#8220;low priority&#8221; Oracle applications that they could pilot moving to another platform and now EnterpriseDB is starting to sound attractive.</p>
<p>I don&#8217;t have a crystal or Magic 8 ball to say where this will lead, but I&#8217;m sure we&#8217;ll all have fun watching ;-)  One thing is for sure &#8211; MySQL is under pressure from all sides and there&#8217;s a viable alternative to Oracle&#8217;s core database platform. Now <a title="wsj oracle sun mysql" href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703808904574526072224895160.html?mod=rss_whats_news_us" target="_blank">Oracle just needs to figure out if it can fix the mess it&#8217;s in with the EU</a> ;-)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.michaeldolan.com/1449/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Sun &#8211; Oracle Analysis</title>
		<link>http://www.michaeldolan.com/1403</link>
		<comments>http://www.michaeldolan.com/1403#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 22 Apr 2009 09:29:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>md</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA["Open"Solaris]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[MySQL]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[OEL]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Open Source Software]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[OpenOffice]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Oracle]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Solaris]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sun]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.michaeldolan.com/?p=1403</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I just read Stephen O&#8217;Grady&#8217;s classic Q&#38;A on Sun-Oracle. Another through analysis. There are certainly many angles to this one&#8230; and many questions that will play out over time. http://redmonk.com/sogrady/2009/04/21/settingsun/]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I just read Stephen O&#8217;Grady&#8217;s classic Q&amp;A on Sun-Oracle. Another through analysis. There are certainly many angles to this one&#8230; and many questions that will play out over time.</p>
<p><a href="http://redmonk.com/sogrady/2009/04/21/settingsun/">http://redmonk.com/sogrady/2009/04/21/settingsun/</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.michaeldolan.com/1403/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>LinkedIn runs on the LAMP stack &#8211; and it&#8217;s suddenly news?</title>
		<link>http://www.michaeldolan.com/1255</link>
		<comments>http://www.michaeldolan.com/1255#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 31 Jul 2008 21:34:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>md</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Linux]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[MySQL]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Open Source Software]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.michaeldolan.com/?p=1255</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I couldn&#8217;t help but find myself perplexed when I got an email on my iPhone yesterday from a well known figure in the Linux world. He (and subsequently I) were baffled that Sun must be combing through existing LAMP users for new references &#8211; LinkedIn uses LAMP. Well call me shocked&#8230; don&#8217;t 90% of the [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I couldn&#8217;t help but find myself perplexed when I got an email on my iPhone yesterday from a well known figure in the Linux world. He (and subsequently I) were baffled that Sun must be combing through existing LAMP users for new references &#8211; LinkedIn uses LAMP. Well call me shocked&#8230; don&#8217;t 90% of the web companies out there run LAMP? (excluding those Microsoft has bought) I&#8217;m guessing the &#8220;new news&#8221; is that Sun signed up LinkedIn for a MySQL support contract for the first time, but are we going through a second LAMP hype cycle?</p>
<p><a title="linkedin runs LAMP" href="http://biz.yahoo.com/bw/080728/20080728005247.html?.v=1" target="_blank">http://biz.yahoo.com/bw/080728/20080728005247.html?.v=1</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.michaeldolan.com/1255/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

