Oracle buys Innobase

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
214 messages Options
1234 ... 11
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Oracle buys Innobase

Jim C. Nasby
http://lnk.nu/prnewswire.com/4dv.pl
--
Jim C. Nasby, Sr. Engineering Consultant      [hidden email]
Pervasive Software      http://pervasive.com    work: 512-231-6117
vcard: http://jim.nasby.net/pervasive.vcf       cell: 512-569-9461

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Oracle buys Innobase

Bruce Momjian-2
Jim C. Nasby wrote:
> http://lnk.nu/prnewswire.com/4dv.pl

Amazing.  You have to love the totally unrelated license mention Oracle
added to the press release:

        InnoDB is not a standalone database product:  it is distributed as a
        part of the MySQL database.  InnoDB's contractual relationship with
        MySQL comes up for renewal next year.  Oracle fully expects to negotiate
        an extension of that relationship.

Read $$$.

This is the logical way Oracle would attack a competitor (buy up a key
piece of their technology).  Oracle looked for MySQL's easiest weakness
to exploit, and found it.  It isn't even vaguely cloaked, because InnoDB
doesn't even have a db product, it is just licensed by MySQL.  This
certainly puts a dent in the MySQL 5.0 press buzz, which I suppose was
part of the timing.

Do open source users want licensed technology from a company owned by
Oracle?  I doubt it.   My guess is that the InnoDB license will now be
used as FUD against MySQL perpetually.

This might also be related to the article by the MySQL CEO saying they
are not competing with Oracle:

        http://www.cbronline.com/article_news.asp?guid=9231B8BD-3788-4DB2-B85F-707E75857B58

This might be a sort of detente saying MySQL will not move into Oracle
accounts.  Certainly the MySQL CEO must have known this was coming, so
his comments now appear in a different light.

What is our vulnerability?  Oracle offering big-money jobs to PostgreSQL
developers.  I think that is our only weakness, unless they buy Marc
(Marc, are you for sale? :-) ) and own the domains and trademark.

Ultimately, MySQL should drop InnoDB.

--
  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us
  [hidden email]               |  (610) 359-1001
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  13 Roberts Road
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives?

               http://archives.postgresql.org
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Oracle buys Innobase

Josh berkus
Bruce,

> What is our vulnerability?  Oracle offering big-money jobs to PostgreSQL
> developers.  I think that is our only weakness, unless they buy Marc
> (Marc, are you for sale? :-):-) ) and own the domains and trademark.

Well, that *is* a serious concern.   That's why Marc and I are working on
making sure these things are legally protected.

--
--Josh

Josh Berkus
Aglio Database Solutions
San Francisco

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Oracle buys Innobase

Aly Dharshi
In reply to this post by Bruce Momjian-2

> Ultimately, MySQL should drop InnoDB.

  This will happen eventually, there is no doubt, Sun seems like its
going to eventually integrate PostgreSQL into Solaris as a pkg most
likely:

http://www.computerworld.com.au/index.php/id;116679278;fp;16;fpid;0

  Hopefully that should make PostgreSQL shine even more. Maybe we
may also see some @sun.com contributers, okay that maybe wishful thinking.

  Cheers,

  Aly.

--
Aly S.P Dharshi
[hidden email]

  "A good speech is like a good dress
   that's short enough to be interesting
   and long enough to cover the subject"

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Oracle buys Innobase

Bruce Momjian-2
Aly S.P Dharshi wrote:

>
> > Ultimately, MySQL should drop InnoDB.
>
>   This will happen eventually, there is no doubt, Sun seems like its
> going to eventually integrate PostgreSQL into Solaris as a pkg most
> likely:
>
> http://www.computerworld.com.au/index.php/id;116679278;fp;16;fpid;0
>
>   Hopefully that should make PostgreSQL shine even more. Maybe we
> may also see some @sun.com contributers, okay that maybe wishful thinking.

I have seen @sun.com posters already, so it has started.

--
  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us
  [hidden email]               |  (610) 359-1001
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  13 Roberts Road
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to
       choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not
       match
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Oracle buys Innobase

Tom Lane-2
In reply to this post by Bruce Momjian-2
Bruce Momjian <[hidden email]> writes:
> Ultimately, MySQL should drop InnoDB.

Given that MyISAM is still their first love, I don't think that outcome
is preposterous at all.  If Oracle tries to squeeze too hard, that's
probably exactly what they'll do.  It'll put a bit of a dent in their
claims to having transaction support, but I think their bread-and-butter
applications are still mostly MyISAM.

                        regards, tom lane

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Oracle buys Innobase

Marc G. Fournier-2
In reply to this post by Bruce Momjian-2
On Fri, 7 Oct 2005, Bruce Momjian wrote:

> What is our vulnerability?  Oracle offering big-money jobs to PostgreSQL
> developers.  I think that is our only weakness, unless they buy Marc
> (Marc, are you for sale? :-) ) and own the domains and trademark.

I'm not for sale, else I would have sold a *long* time ago ...

----
Marc G. Fournier           Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org)
Email: [hidden email]           Yahoo!: yscrappy              ICQ: 7615664

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?

               http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Oracle buys Innobase

Denis Lussier-2
In reply to this post by Jim C. Nasby
Re: [pgsql-advocacy] [GENERAL] Oracle buys Innobase
It may be hard for u to resist if those wacky guyz from Redwood offered eight figures (and I'm not counting the ones to the right of the decimal point).
 
--Luss


From: [hidden email] on behalf of Marc G. Fournier
Sent: Fri 10/7/2005 4:14 PM
To: Bruce Momjian
Cc: Jim C. Nasby; [hidden email]; PostgreSQL advocacy
Subject: Re: [pgsql-advocacy] [GENERAL] Oracle buys Innobase

On Fri, 7 Oct 2005, Bruce Momjian wrote:

> What is our vulnerability?  Oracle offering big-money jobs to PostgreSQL
> developers.  I think that is our only weakness, unless they buy Marc
> (Marc, are you for sale? :-) ) and own the domains and trademark.

I'm not for sale, else I would have sold a *long* time ago ...

----
Marc G. Fournier           Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org)
Email: [hidden email]           Yahoo!: yscrappy              ICQ: 7615664

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?

               http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Oracle buys Innobase

Andreas Kretschmer-2
In reply to this post by Bruce Momjian-2
Bruce Momjian <[hidden email]> schrieb:
> Ultimately, MySQL should drop InnoDB.

http://forums.mysql.com/read.php?3,48400,48400#msg-48400

InnoDB is GPL. But, i'm also confused.

My guess: a fork in the future.



Regards, Andreas
--
Really, I'm not out to destroy Microsoft. That will just be a completely
unintentional side effect. (Linus Torvalds)
Kaufbach, Saxony, Germany, Europe.              N 51.05082°, E 13.56889°

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 5: don't forget to increase your free space map settings
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Oracle buys Innobase

Scott Marlowe
In reply to this post by Jim C. Nasby
RE: [GENERAL] Oracle buys Innobase

(This is via Exchange Web client, I apologize in advance for any htmlitudeiness of this message)

What it comes down to is this.  MySQL is dual licensed.  You can use the GPL version, or the commercial version.  In order to sell the commercially licensed version, MySQL must have the rights to all the code in their base.  So, in order for MySQL to sell a commercail version of MySQL with innodb support, they have to pay innobase a bit to include it, or rip it out.

So, now Oracle can just raise the price high enough that either the commercial version of MySQL has to go up to cover the price, or they are forced to remove it.  If MySQL makes the choice to remove it from the commercial version, they will likely take it out of the GPL version as well, since they likely don't want the commercially licensed version to be the red headed step child of the GPL version, since their business plan relies on convincing people they need the commercial license as much as possible.


-----Original Message-----
From: [hidden email] on behalf of Andreas Kretschmer
Sent: Sat 10/8/2005 3:34 AM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Oracle buys Innobase

Bruce Momjian <[hidden email]> schrieb:
> Ultimately, MySQL should drop InnoDB.

http://forums.mysql.com/read.php?3,48400,48400#msg-48400

InnoDB is GPL. But, i'm also confused.

My guess: a fork in the future.



Regards, Andreas
--
Really, I'm not out to destroy Microsoft. That will just be a completely
unintentional side effect. (Linus Torvalds)
Kaufbach, Saxony, Germany, Europe.              N 51.05082°, E 13.56889°

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 5: don't forget to increase your free space map settings


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Oracle buys Innobase

Jan Wieck
In reply to this post by Andreas Kretschmer-2
On 10/8/2005 4:34 AM, Andreas Kretschmer wrote:

> Bruce Momjian <[hidden email]> schrieb:
>> Ultimately, MySQL should drop InnoDB.
>
> http://forums.mysql.com/read.php?3,48400,48400#msg-48400
>
> InnoDB is GPL. But, i'm also confused.
>
> My guess: a fork in the future.

This whole GPL forking thing is still the same as it was before. One can
only take the last version, released under GPL, and build a GPL-only
project based on it.

Oracle bought the copyright of InnoDB with the company. So if anything
goes wrong during their upcoming relicensing talk, MySQL can of course
fork off a GPL version of InnoDB, but that fork cannot be included in
their commercial version of MySQL. What value would that fork have for
them then? Using a pure GPL fork of InnoDB is in conflict with their own
licensing scheme and I don't think MySQL is in the position to say bye
to dual licensing.

To have a really good position when talking to Oracle, MySQL will need
to brush up on the BDB support, and that pretty quick.


Jan

--
#======================================================================#
# It's easier to get forgiveness for being wrong than for being right. #
# Let's break this rule - forgive me.                                  #
#================================================== [hidden email] #

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?

               http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Oracle buys Innobase

Bruce Momjian-2
Jan Wieck wrote:

> On 10/8/2005 4:34 AM, Andreas Kretschmer wrote:
>
> > Bruce Momjian <[hidden email]> schrieb:
> >> Ultimately, MySQL should drop InnoDB.
> >
> > http://forums.mysql.com/read.php?3,48400,48400#msg-48400
> >
> > InnoDB is GPL. But, i'm also confused.
> >
> > My guess: a fork in the future.
>
> This whole GPL forking thing is still the same as it was before. One can
> only take the last version, released under GPL, and build a GPL-only
> project based on it.
>
> Oracle bought the copyright of InnoDB with the company. So if anything
> goes wrong during their upcoming relicensing talk, MySQL can of course
> fork off a GPL version of InnoDB, but that fork cannot be included in
> their commercial version of MySQL. What value would that fork have for
> them then? Using a pure GPL fork of InnoDB is in conflict with their own
> licensing scheme and I don't think MySQL is in the position to say bye
> to dual licensing.
>
> To have a really good position when talking to Oracle, MySQL will need
> to brush up on the BDB support, and that pretty quick.

What about the patents InnoDB might hold?  It would be easier to enforce
a patent based on the fact that they are using code actually developed
by the patent holder.

--
  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us
  [hidden email]               |  (610) 359-1001
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  13 Roberts Road
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
       subscribe-nomail command to [hidden email] so that your
       message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Oracle buys Innobase

Jan Wieck
On 10/8/2005 12:13 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote:

> Jan Wieck wrote:
>> To have a really good position when talking to Oracle, MySQL will need
>> to brush up on the BDB support, and that pretty quick.
>
> What about the patents InnoDB might hold?  It would be easier to enforce
> a patent based on the fact that they are using code actually developed
> by the patent holder.

That too.

What strikes me a little odd is how brief the responses from the MySQL
side are. Marten Mickos welcomes them, does some 2 sentence handwaving
about licensing and the glorious freedom of open source, and then the
rest of the statement is the usual blah blah about MySQL that you find
in every other press release.

It almost seems as if MySQL wasn't exactly prepared for this deal to
come through - or worse, that they are surprised about it. Although I
can't believe they wouldn't have known about it in advance.


Jan

--
#======================================================================#
# It's easier to get forgiveness for being wrong than for being right. #
# Let's break this rule - forgive me.                                  #
#================================================== [hidden email] #

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 5: don't forget to increase your free space map settings
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Oracle buys Innobase

John Dean
Hi

That is terrific news being a former employee of MySQL - Oracle buys
Innobase. I was never a fan of MySQL, personally but when Marten Mikos and
the rest of the business wonks joined the Company I knew then it was time
to get out. I met the author of Innobase once at the first MySQL employees
meeting. I was asked what for an opinion on Heikki Tuuri. I came straight
to point and told Monty and David (Axmark) that Heikki Tuuri can not be
trusted. It seems I was right. Mr Tuuri has no interest in supporting the
OS commumity. His only interest is in making money. My gut feeling now is
that eventually Oracle will buy off Innobase lock stock and barell Then
Innonbase will get consigned to File 13. I now see MySQL heading for a long
slow death; it couldn't happen to a nicer group of people :) Thank God for
PostreSQL

At 18:42 08/10/2005, Jan Wieck wrote:

>On 10/8/2005 12:13 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
>>Jan Wieck wrote:
>>>To have a really good position when talking to Oracle, MySQL will need
>>>to brush up on the BDB support, and that pretty quick.
>>What about the patents InnoDB might hold?  It would be easier to enforce
>>a patent based on the fact that they are using code actually developed
>>by the patent holder.
>
>That too.
>
>What strikes me a little odd is how brief the responses from the MySQL
>side are. Marten Mickos welcomes them, does some 2 sentence handwaving
>about licensing and the glorious freedom of open source, and then the rest
>of the statement is the usual blah blah about MySQL that you find in every
>other press release.
>
>It almost seems as if MySQL wasn't exactly prepared for this deal to come
>through - or worse, that they are surprised about it. Although I can't
>believe they wouldn't have known about it in advance.
>
>
>Jan
>
>--
>#======================================================================#
># It's easier to get forgiveness for being wrong than for being right. #
># Let's break this rule - forgive me.                                  #
>#================================================== [hidden email] #
>
>---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
>TIP 5: don't forget to increase your free space map settings
>

---

Regards
John Dean,
co-author of Rekall,
the only alternative
to MS Access


---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
       subscribe-nomail command to [hidden email] so that your
       message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Oracle buys Innobase

Ned Lilly
In reply to this post by Jan Wieck
Jan Wieck wrote:

> To have a really good position when talking to Oracle, MySQL will need
> to brush up on the BDB support, and that pretty quick.

Maybe Oracle will buy Sleepycat too, and foreclose that option ;-)

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to
       choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not
       match
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Oracle buys Innobase

Marc G. Fournier-2
In reply to this post by Jan Wieck
On Sat, 8 Oct 2005, Jan Wieck wrote:

> On 10/8/2005 12:13 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
>> Jan Wieck wrote:
>>> To have a really good position when talking to Oracle, MySQL will need to
>>> brush up on the BDB support, and that pretty quick.
>>
>> What about the patents InnoDB might hold?  It would be easier to enforce
>> a patent based on the fact that they are using code actually developed
>> by the patent holder.
>
> That too.
>
> What strikes me a little odd is how brief the responses from the MySQL side
> are. Marten Mickos welcomes them, does some 2 sentence handwaving about
> licensing and the glorious freedom of open source, and then the rest of the
> statement is the usual blah blah about MySQL that you find in every other
> press release.
>
> It almost seems as if MySQL wasn't exactly prepared for this deal to come
> through - or worse, that they are surprised about it. Although I can't
> believe they wouldn't have known about it in advance.

Or, they knew about it and have some sort of contigency plan already in
place for when the license does expire ... ?

----
Marc G. Fournier           Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org)
Email: [hidden email]           Yahoo!: yscrappy              ICQ: 7615664

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?

               http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Oracle buys Innobase

Josh berkus
In reply to this post by Bruce Momjian-2
Bruce, Aly,

> >   Hopefully that should make PostgreSQL shine even more. Maybe we
> > may also see some @sun.com contributers, okay that maybe wishful
> > thinking.
>
> I have seen @sun.com posters already, so it has started.

Actually, the Sun folks have been contributing indirectly for a while, and are
working on getting Solaris binary packaging organized.   They're just not big
on joining mailing lists, something we need to educate them on.

--
Josh Berkus
Aglio Database Solutions
San Francisco

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Oracle buys Innobase

felix-5
In reply to this post by Scott Marlowe
On Sat, Oct 08, 2005 at 10:31:30AM -0500, Scott Marlowe wrote:

> What it comes down to is this.  MySQL is dual licensed.  You can use
> the GPL version, or the commercial version.  In order to sell the
> commercially licensed version, MySQL must have the rights to all the
> code in their base.  So, in order for MySQL to sell a commercail
> version of MySQL with innodb support, they have to pay innobase a
> bit to include it, or rip it out.

I don't understand.  If both MySQL and Innodb are GPL licensed,
commercial or not should make no difference, and they can add all the
GPL changes they want o the last Innodb GPL release.

What am I missing?

--
            ... _._. ._ ._. . _._. ._. ___ .__ ._. . .__. ._ .. ._.
     Felix Finch: scarecrow repairman & rocket surgeon / [hidden email]
  GPG = E987 4493 C860 246C 3B1E  6477 7838 76E9 182E 8151 ITAR license #4933
I've found a solution to Fermat's Last Theorem but I see I've run out of room o

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Oracle buys Innobase

Martin Marques
El Sáb 08 Oct 2005 18:11, [hidden email] escribió:

> On Sat, Oct 08, 2005 at 10:31:30AM -0500, Scott Marlowe wrote:
>
> > What it comes down to is this.  MySQL is dual licensed.  You can use
> > the GPL version, or the commercial version.  In order to sell the
> > commercially licensed version, MySQL must have the rights to all the
> > code in their base.  So, in order for MySQL to sell a commercail
> > version of MySQL with innodb support, they have to pay innobase a
> > bit to include it, or rip it out.
>
> I don't understand.  If both MySQL and Innodb are GPL licensed,
> commercial or not should make no difference, and they can add all the
> GPL changes they want o the last Innodb GPL release.
>
> What am I missing?

They can't enforce a commercial licence over a GPL aplication.

--
select 'mmarques' || '@' || 'unl.edu.ar' AS email;
---------------------------------------------------------
Martín Marqués          |   Programador, DBA
Centro de Telemática |     Administrador
               Universidad Nacional
                    del Litoral
---------------------------------------------------------

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 5: don't forget to increase your free space map settings
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Oracle buys Innobase

Tom Lane-2
In reply to this post by felix-5
[hidden email] writes:
> I don't understand.  If both MySQL and Innodb are GPL licensed,
> commercial or not should make no difference, and they can add all the
> GPL changes they want o the last Innodb GPL release.

> What am I missing?

MySQL AB wants to make money by selling non-GPL versions of MySQL.
They can certainly dual-license MySQL itself, because they own it
outright, but they could not ship InnoDB as part of a non-GPL-license
MySQL sale without InnoDB's (and now Oracle's) permission.  So they've
got a financial problem with this.

                        regards, tom lane

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
       subscribe-nomail command to [hidden email] so that your
       message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
1234 ... 11