11 ms·

Wikipedia Adopts MariaDB

151 points by JeremyMorgan 13y ago

PaulHoule 13y ago
This article has many facts wrong. It seems that MySQL development halted entirely at Sun. I was concerned about Oracle's motives w.r.t MySQL but I can say they have come out with major new releases that improve MySQL in substantial ways. For instance, they've greatly improved the scalability of InnoDB on large SMP machines. On the other hand, neither Sun nor Oracle have been really wanting to win with MySQL either and I think we could have seen more and different innovation in MySQL if it had been in other hands. The Wikipedia win is big for MariaDB because it's a show of confidence that it works in demanding applications.
- arkitaip 13y ago
  Was there ever a doubt that MariaDB wouldn't work in demanding applications? It's pretty much MySQL all the way down.
  - mjolk 13y ago
    "No one ever got fired for buying IBM." As a corollary, no one wants to be the guy that suggested MongoDB before it caused an outage.
    - kbenson 13y ago
      I think that only makes sense if you don't know what MariaDB is. It's a fork that attempts to maintain high compatibility, run by the founder of MySQL. What it isn't is a different program entirely, with a different protocol, syntax, scalability, consistency and community.
      - mjolk 13y ago
        You missed the point. The idea is management and investor confidence, buy-in. Here's how it works in most companies: MySQL goes down = something seriously bad happened. MariaDB went down = that database that Ted suggested sure is a piece of shit.
        kbenson 13y ago
        Well that depends on how Ted presented it, doesn't it? If he says "Let's try this other database instead of MySQL" may turn out different than if he says "Let's try this other version of MySQL put out by MariaDB". In the end it comes down to having data to support your position though. If MariaDB goes down, and you can't answer whether it would have happened the same in MySQL, then maybe you shouldn't be making database suggestions. If it wouldn't have happened to MySQL, well then people were right to be wary, weren't they?
    - rz2k 13y ago
      There are situations where MongoDB and the like are specifically more appropriate than traditional databases, and I do not include not understanding SQL syntax. In such situations where a ratio of needed scale to the resources available is particularly high, MySQL and other traditional databases are not a real option anyway. However, there are of course also situations where, if you try to use MongoDB as a drop in replacement for a traditional database and then are surprised about data loss in exotic situations, for example, then you weren't really doing your job in the first place if the different goals never came up in your research of solutions.
  - Shorel 13y ago
    It doesn't work for my employer's application. May be the lots and lots of SPs are too much for MariaDB, but no, it is not a 100% replacement drop in. I have tried.
mdesq 13y ago
Ever since Oracle has taken hold of MySQL (I was at Oracle at the time, and saw their goals firsthand), they have been trying to extract as much money as possible from anyone using the database in a commercial way. Just the mention of MySQL strikes fear in the heart of any executive who has had any interaction with the mob that is the Oracle money extraction machine. The sooner we all can move on and keep from using MySQL, the better, and good riddance to it and the red horse it unfortunately rides in on.
mattwritescode 13y ago
So bets on how long it will be until MariaDB is scooped by Oracle?
- AaronBBrown 13y ago
  MariaDB basically exists because of Monty's hatred for Oracle (which bought Sun after Sun bought MySQL for wheelbarrows full of money from Monty). It won't happen.
  - duwease 13y ago
    If it was me, I'd keep cranking out superior databases, selling them for a billion, and starting on the next one as fast as they'd buy em :)
    - kbd 13y ago
      I think that's what Stonebreaker did with PostgreSQL, VoltDB, Vertica...
      - haakon 13y ago
        Not sure if intentional, but Stonebreaker is an awesome misspelling of Stonebraker.
        kbd 13y ago
        Yes, I misspelled Stonebraker, thanks for the correction.
    - yyqux 13y ago
      I think it would be a bit premature to call MariaDB superior to MySQL. Also it should be noted that the InnoDB storage engine was developed outside of MySQL AB. InnoDB is a helluva lot better than MyISAM for most applications because of performance and support for transactions, consistency, etc. Without it I don't think that MySQL would be a good candidate for many applications, particularly given that Postgres has improved a lot. I.e. I'm not sure Monty should really get credit for everything about MySQL/MariaDB.
dangrossman 13y ago
Is there a reason to choose MariaDB over Percona or vice-versa? They're both drop-in replacements for MySQL and both replace InnoDB with XtraDB (which Percona makes).
- leef 13y ago
  The only real feature MariaDB offers over vanilla MySQL and Percona is an improved optimizer for complex sql queries [1]. In most cases Percona seems to be a win over both MySQL and MariaDB as it is just patch layer over MySQL with features and tweaks that real production users see and need. These features tend to end up in future MySQL releases like saving and restoring the buffer pool allowing mysql to warm start. I believe that feature made it in to MySQL 5.6 but was added to percona/mysql 5.1. [1] http://blog.mariadb.org/mariadb-5-3-optimizer-benchmark/ http://blog.mariadb.org/mariadb-5-3-optimizer-benchmark/
cs702 13y ago
Official announcement: https://blog.wikimedia.org/2013/04/22/wikipedia-adopts-mariadb/ https://blog.wikimedia.org/2013/04/22/wikipedia-adopts-maria... MariaDB looks likely to inherit a big slice, possibly even a majority, of MySQL's user base over time. It's not just because MariaDB is as good as any of the "official" editions of MySQL offered by Oracle, but because it has only a single code base under a single Free license (as opposed to differently licensed "open source" and "enterprise" editions), because it has an active not-for-profit foundation looking out for the project and the community[1], and because many of the original contributors to MySQL, including founder Monty Widenius, are now working full-time on MariaDB.[2] Say hello to the new MySQL -- MariaDB -- same as the old MySQL! -- [1] https://mariadb.org/en/foundation/ https://mariadb.org/en/foundation/ [2] http://www.skysql.com/news-and-events/press-releases/skysql-merges-with-mariadb-developers http://www.skysql.com/news-and-events/press-releases/skysql-...
- cagenut 13y ago
  The official post is excellent, we should swap out the blogspam link for it. "For our most common query type, 95th percentile times over an 8-hour period dropped from 56ms to 43ms and the average from 15.4ms to 12.7ms. 50th percentile times remained a bit better with the 5.1-facebook build over the sample period, 0.185ms vs. 0.194ms. Many query types were 4-15% faster with MariaDB 5.5.30 under production load, a few were 5% slower, and nothing appeared aberrant beyond those bounds."
eliot_sykes 13y ago
Anyone know of any hosted MariaDB offerings out there that can be used with Heroku?
tyleregeto 13y ago
The big battle MariaDB (or any DB) is going to have is gaining ground in the shared web host space. That makes up a pretty large portion of websites, and there is no incentive for those providers to change. I'd love to see other DB options in that space, its all PHP/MySQL.
- richardwhiuk 13y ago
  That'll probably happen - mainly because the distributions will probably switch over to MariaDB. I'd expect Ubuntu, Debian, CentOS etc to all ship MariaDB as an upgrade at some point.
  - e12e 13y ago
    Unfortunately it would appear Debian is actually lagging a bit behind in this regard: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=565308 http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=565308
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
voidlogic 13y ago
Is MariaDB still substantially slower than MySQL? http://dimitrik.free.fr/blog/archives/2013/02/mysql-performance-mysql-56-vs-mysql-55-vs-mariadb-55.html http://dimitrik.free.fr/blog/archives/2013/02/mysql-performa...
- jlogsdon 13y ago
  The official blog post makes it sound like overall it was a performance gain with a few edge cases coming out 5% slower.
  - voidlogic 13y ago
    I wish it talked more about their DB hardware, I would believe MariaDB is more performant for scale out, whereas the MySQL improvement have been targeting scale up (something Oracle is very good at).
ck2 13y ago
The only problem I foresee with MariaDB is they have no interest in porting innodb fulltext search like MySQL 5.6 Sure there are other fulltext solutions but to simply convert myisam to innodb, FTS on innodb with the same queries is rather helpful.

151 points by JeremyMorgan 13y ago

This article has many facts wrong. It seems that MySQL development halted entirely at Sun. I was concerned about Oracle's motives w.r.t MySQL but I can say they have come out with major new releases that improve MySQL in substantial ways. For instance, they've greatly improved the scalability of InnoDB on large SMP machines. On the other hand, neither Sun nor Oracle have been really wanting to win with MySQL either and I think we could have seen more and different innovation in MySQL if it had been in other hands. The Wikipedia win is big for MariaDB because it's a show of confidence that it works in demanding applications.

arkitaip 13y ago
Was there ever a doubt that MariaDB wouldn't work in demanding applications? It's pretty much MySQL all the way down.
- mjolk 13y ago
  "No one ever got fired for buying IBM." As a corollary, no one wants to be the guy that suggested MongoDB before it caused an outage.
  - kbenson 13y ago
    I think that only makes sense if you don't know what MariaDB is. It's a fork that attempts to maintain high compatibility, run by the founder of MySQL. What it isn't is a different program entirely, with a different protocol, syntax, scalability, consistency and community.
    - mjolk 13y ago
      You missed the point. The idea is management and investor confidence, buy-in. Here's how it works in most companies: MySQL goes down = something seriously bad happened. MariaDB went down = that database that Ted suggested sure is a piece of shit.
      - kbenson 13y ago
        Well that depends on how Ted presented it, doesn't it? If he says "Let's try this other database instead of MySQL" may turn out different than if he says "Let's try this other version of MySQL put out by MariaDB". In the end it comes down to having data to support your position though. If MariaDB goes down, and you can't answer whether it would have happened the same in MySQL, then maybe you shouldn't be making database suggestions. If it wouldn't have happened to MySQL, well then people were right to be wary, weren't they?
  - rz2k 13y ago
    There are situations where MongoDB and the like are specifically more appropriate than traditional databases, and I do not include not understanding SQL syntax. In such situations where a ratio of needed scale to the resources available is particularly high, MySQL and other traditional databases are not a real option anyway. However, there are of course also situations where, if you try to use MongoDB as a drop in replacement for a traditional database and then are surprised about data loss in exotic situations, for example, then you weren't really doing your job in the first place if the different goals never came up in your research of solutions.
- Shorel 13y ago
  It doesn't work for my employer's application. May be the lots and lots of SPs are too much for MariaDB, but no, it is not a 100% replacement drop in. I have tried.

mdesq 13y ago

Ever since Oracle has taken hold of MySQL (I was at Oracle at the time, and saw their goals firsthand), they have been trying to extract as much money as possible from anyone using the database in a commercial way. Just the mention of MySQL strikes fear in the heart of any executive who has had any interaction with the mob that is the Oracle money extraction machine. The sooner we all can move on and keep from using MySQL, the better, and good riddance to it and the red horse it unfortunately rides in on.

mattwritescode 13y ago

So bets on how long it will be until MariaDB is scooped by Oracle?

AaronBBrown 13y ago
MariaDB basically exists because of Monty's hatred for Oracle (which bought Sun after Sun bought MySQL for wheelbarrows full of money from Monty). It won't happen.
- duwease 13y ago
  If it was me, I'd keep cranking out superior databases, selling them for a billion, and starting on the next one as fast as they'd buy em :)
  - kbd 13y ago
    I think that's what Stonebreaker did with PostgreSQL, VoltDB, Vertica...
    - haakon 13y ago
      Not sure if intentional, but Stonebreaker is an awesome misspelling of Stonebraker.
      - kbd 13y ago
        Yes, I misspelled Stonebraker, thanks for the correction.
  - yyqux 13y ago
    I think it would be a bit premature to call MariaDB superior to MySQL. Also it should be noted that the InnoDB storage engine was developed outside of MySQL AB. InnoDB is a helluva lot better than MyISAM for most applications because of performance and support for transactions, consistency, etc. Without it I don't think that MySQL would be a good candidate for many applications, particularly given that Postgres has improved a lot. I.e. I'm not sure Monty should really get credit for everything about MySQL/MariaDB.

dangrossman 13y ago

Is there a reason to choose MariaDB over Percona or vice-versa? They're both drop-in replacements for MySQL and both replace InnoDB with XtraDB (which Percona makes).

leef 13y ago
The only real feature MariaDB offers over vanilla MySQL and Percona is an improved optimizer for complex sql queries [1]. In most cases Percona seems to be a win over both MySQL and MariaDB as it is just patch layer over MySQL with features and tweaks that real production users see and need. These features tend to end up in future MySQL releases like saving and restoring the buffer pool allowing mysql to warm start. I believe that feature made it in to MySQL 5.6 but was added to percona/mysql 5.1. [1] http://blog.mariadb.org/mariadb-5-3-optimizer-benchmark/ http://blog.mariadb.org/mariadb-5-3-optimizer-benchmark/

cs702 13y ago

Official announcement: https://blog.wikimedia.org/2013/04/22/wikipedia-adopts-mariadb/ https://blog.wikimedia.org/2013/04/22/wikipedia-adopts-maria... MariaDB looks likely to inherit a big slice, possibly even a majority, of MySQL's user base over time. It's not just because MariaDB is as good as any of the "official" editions of MySQL offered by Oracle, but because it has only a single code base under a single Free license (as opposed to differently licensed "open source" and "enterprise" editions), because it has an active not-for-profit foundation looking out for the project and the community[1], and because many of the original contributors to MySQL, including founder Monty Widenius, are now working full-time on MariaDB.[2] Say hello to the new MySQL -- MariaDB -- same as the old MySQL! -- [1] https://mariadb.org/en/foundation/ https://mariadb.org/en/foundation/ [2] http://www.skysql.com/news-and-events/press-releases/skysql-merges-with-mariadb-developers http://www.skysql.com/news-and-events/press-releases/skysql-...

cagenut 13y ago
The official post is excellent, we should swap out the blogspam link for it. "For our most common query type, 95th percentile times over an 8-hour period dropped from 56ms to 43ms and the average from 15.4ms to 12.7ms. 50th percentile times remained a bit better with the 5.1-facebook build over the sample period, 0.185ms vs. 0.194ms. Many query types were 4-15% faster with MariaDB 5.5.30 under production load, a few were 5% slower, and nothing appeared aberrant beyond those bounds."

eliot_sykes 13y ago

Anyone know of any hosted MariaDB offerings out there that can be used with Heroku?

tyleregeto 13y ago

The big battle MariaDB (or any DB) is going to have is gaining ground in the shared web host space. That makes up a pretty large portion of websites, and there is no incentive for those providers to change. I'd love to see other DB options in that space, its all PHP/MySQL.

richardwhiuk 13y ago
That'll probably happen - mainly because the distributions will probably switch over to MariaDB. I'd expect Ubuntu, Debian, CentOS etc to all ship MariaDB as an upgrade at some point.
- e12e 13y ago
  Unfortunately it would appear Debian is actually lagging a bit behind in this regard: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=565308 http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=565308

deleted 13y ago

[deleted]

voidlogic 13y ago

Is MariaDB still substantially slower than MySQL? http://dimitrik.free.fr/blog/archives/2013/02/mysql-performance-mysql-56-vs-mysql-55-vs-mariadb-55.html http://dimitrik.free.fr/blog/archives/2013/02/mysql-performa...

jlogsdon 13y ago
The official blog post makes it sound like overall it was a performance gain with a few edge cases coming out 5% slower.
- voidlogic 13y ago
  I wish it talked more about their DB hardware, I would believe MariaDB is more performant for scale out, whereas the MySQL improvement have been targeting scale up (something Oracle is very good at).

ck2 13y ago

The only problem I foresee with MariaDB is they have no interest in porting innodb fulltext search like MySQL 5.6 Sure there are other fulltext solutions but to simply convert myisam to innodb, FTS on innodb with the same queries is rather helpful.