4 ms·
Looks like it's not open source, though they're apparently considering it: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=729338 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=729338
by zhyder 17y ago
Looks like it's not open source, though they're apparently considering it: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=729338 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=729338 . For such an important part of infrastructure, I don't think closed source will do, especially not from a startup that's worked on it for only a few months. Open sourcing will:
- Allow others to vet your codebase for stability and security
- Give customers some recourse if your startup folds
- Make you comparable to MyISAM/InnoDB/PostgreSQL, unless you want to be compared to Oracle or Microsoft SQL
- leif 17y agoTo your points: - Nothing much I can say about stability and security, but then again, we're not saying it's stable and secure yet. Besides, people trust Oracle without seeing their sources, don't they? - If our startup folds, I doubt we'll drag our source to the grave. That said, maybe it gives our users incentive to make sure we don't fold? :P - There are closed-source MySQL storage engines out there with whom we'd rather be compared (TokuDB, Falcon (is Falcon open-source?)). We just don't want to close any doors yet. If it makes good business sense, we'd be glad to open the source.
- zhyder 17y agoOracle's been around a while and their stability and security have been battle-tested, or at least that's the perception that makes a prospective customer trust them. Interesting that there are other closed-source MySQL storage engines. I wonder how big a piece of the pie (among paying or willing-to-pay users) they have compared to MyISAM/InnoDB.