On 14 Dec 2009, at 22:01, Ashley Sheridan <ash@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
On Mon, 2009-12-14 at 15:59 -0600, Philip Thompson wrote:
On Dec 14, 2009, at 12:51 AM, Lester Caine wrote:
Lenin wrote:
You might also like this:
Come on Monty - Lukas Smith http://bit.ly/5lmwwD
I've been watching some of this debate with interest, but I'll
stay with a database that has none of the baggage that MySQL has
always had, and IS currently replacing Oracle in many large sites :)
--
Lester Caine - G8HFL
Do share your db of interest... (and please don't say MSSQL).
~Philip
MSSQL has nearly brought me to tears and could have easily made me
bald
through hair pulling!
I have to say, I do like MySQL, it's very flexible and fast, and being
able to choose different storage engines for different tables in the
same DB is brilliant! I really don't think there's anything to overly
worry about from Oracle, as the two DB's have different audiences.
Thanks,
Ash
http://www.ashleysheridan.co.uk
Unfortunately, I do not share your optimism. I believe that Oracle
taking over MySQL would be a disaster of epic proportions.
The "different audiences" theory has been bought up several times but
I haven't [to date] seen a sound justification for it. Oracle wants
everyone to use ... Oracle, I can't see how this "different audiences"
theory is going to make Oracle promote MySQL, perhaps someone can tell
me?
I don't think the EU would be able to do anything about it. The
powerful companies almost always get what they want.
I don't think Monty wouldn't be doing this unless he felt that
something [put mildly] bad is coming.
What has happened, has happened. Trying to figure out who is to blame
for this mess is pointless. Ideally, It would be nice if Oracle took
its claws off MySQL and found another project to ruin.
Note: I am *not* trying to spread FUD
--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
