51–60 of 97 posts
Time to brush up on Postgres or Firebird. Let Oracle shoot off all their feet.
Most people saying "Time to switch from MySQL" (probably) aren't paying for MySQL. From a business perspective, those people are a net loss anyway. Getting them to switch to something else may actually save Oracle a little money.
I used to enjoy working with Oracle databases, but the horrible pricing and high need for dba maintenance was always discomforting. Switch for a while to MSSQL, but then the market for Windows apps disappeared. Have been using mySQL with very little sort of DB satisfaction. Now I don't know why anyone would not choose PostgreSQL for almost any project. Oracle is a bad apple, making money with methods aking to extorti…
I still wonder why SQLite isn't used more. Granted for busy large sites/applications SQLite is the wrong tool. But most sites using MySQL are small.
It seems Oracle is on a trend to kill everything open source they've acquired from Sun. Java seems to be the only one left, and it would've happened already if they won the trial with Google, but I'm sure they'll do something equally dumb in the future to kill finally Java, too.
There are other open source projects at Oracle that are still "alive". Like Netbeans.
Time to brush up on Postgres or Firebird. Let Oracle shoot off all their feet.
Shoot their feet off how? Most people saying "Time to switch from MySQL" (probably) aren't paying for MySQL. From a business perspective, those people are a net loss anyway. Getting them to switch to something else may actually save Oracle a little money.
Time to brush up on Postgres or Firebird. Let Oracle shoot off all their feet.
I don't know anything about Firebird. Is it really a good replacement for MySQL?
Don't get me wrong, it's a great database and I know a company that use nothing else and won't switch if you paid them, ( They are use .Net ).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I still wonder why SQLite isn't used more. Granted for busy large sites/applications SQLite is the wrong tool. But most sites using MySQL are small.
Disclaimer: It's been a while since I tried to use SQLite for anything. I've never really felt that it was actually easier to use than a client/server DBMS. I can imagine that it's good for some kinds of embedded applications, but for normal web applications I don't see any improvement in usability. Juggling files is not any easier than setting up a connection. And there were always annoyances associated with the sim…
2. There are several really nice front-ends to SQlite, along with the phpmyadmin like app for SQlite. Like MySQL you'll never have to use the command line (for most operations).
3. SQLite is now included with just about every scripting language (except MS' langs - where it's just a matter of downloading the app and an ODBC driver).
4. "Because it requires no configuration and stores information in ordinary disk files, SQLite is a popular choice as the database to back small to medium-sized websites." - sqlite.com
Simple websites. Would I run this site on SQLite? Of course not. Any shopping site with a million users? No. But a personal blog? Yes. A company website used for marketing and information (and maybe a few Contact US pages)? Yes.
There are millions of sites where using MySQl is over-kill. But everyone uses it because, like PHP, it's always there.
5. SQlite uses SQL. Very few commands aren't available.. like you can't write to a View. But I think that's true in MySQl too. There's a small list on sqlite.com. It even has transactions.
Simply put, if you don't require writing to the db from multiple sources (and lets face it, 80% of the sites out there don't.); running your app or site on sqlite is fine.
It seems Oracle is on a trend to kill everything open source they've acquired from Sun. Java seems to be the only one left, and it would've happened already if they won the trial with Google, but I'm sure they'll do something equally dumb in the future to kill finally Java, too.
> It seems Oracle is on a trend to kill everything open source they've acquired from Sun. Oracle is, above everything else, about monetization. If they can't make money out of it, they will either change it so they can make money out of it, or they'll kill it. Sun was generally good at open-source (though not perfect by a long shot, OpenSolaris was not exactly a slam dunk and the CDDL was rather weird — and explicitl…
It also realizes that most of its monetization comes from professional services, and saw that 1) software subscription revenues were declining across the board, proprietary or Open Source, and 2) Open Source created (to IBM's lawyer's eyes) a possible threat to its patent holdings (a considerable revenue stream / business value themselves) which was best addressed by keeping core development outside the organization (Red Hat, Novell/Suse, Kernel.org, Apache.org).
Oracle's direction (as was Sun's somewhat schizoid approach to Free Software / Open Source before as noted by its supporting the Caldera/SCO Group attacks against Linux) are making it a non-credible source. Hence the forking of projects (Lumina, LibreOffice, OpenJDK, MariaDB, etc.) it had inherited.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, it is easy: avoid anything touched by Oracle like the plague.
Unfortunately, that includes hardware too... A friend had 3 out of 13 Oracle servers die with random memory errors (persistent). Of course, if they had a 10K+ service contract they'd be happy to help.