4 ms·

Why won't you use the Oracle version? atm MariaDB isn't a replacement for the stock version of MySQL.

by Thaxll 12y ago

toomuchtodo 12y ago
MariaDB is a drop-in replacement for stock MySQL. It's performance is actually better than MySQL. https://mariadb.com/kb/en/mariadb/mariadb-vs-mysql-compatibility/ https://mariadb.com/kb/en/mariadb/mariadb-vs-mysql-compatibi...
- Thaxll 12y ago
  MySQL has years of proved stability, the performance is BS, one graph means nothing, it's like all the people saying they're running thousands of QPS on a server, you just don't know the benchmark and the type of queries running. I can run 3k SELECT in cache... I'm sure one day MariaDB will replace stock MySQL but clearly it's not ready yet. btw Oracle is doing a good job with MySQL atm.
  - deleted 12y ago
    [deleted]
  - heavenlyhash 12y ago
    My bets are all squarely on MariaDB. MySQL under Oracle is stymied by conflicts of interest. One concrete example is hashjoins, a fairly simple and efficient strategy for many general purpose workloads: MariaDB supports hashing as a join strategy since 5.3/5.5 [1] back in 2011. MySQL, to the best of my knowledge, still lacks any implementation of this. OracleDB, of course, supports hash joins. Oracle has every incentive not to implement hash joins in MySQL because hash joins are one of the performance features that they use to drive sales of OracleDB. [1] https://mariadb.com/kb/en/mariadb/what-is-mariadb-53/#join-optimizations https://mariadb.com/kb/en/mariadb/what-is-mariadb-53/#join-o...
  - sjwright 12y ago
    > Oracle is doing a good job with MySQL atm. Obvious troll is obvious. > the performance is BS We're extremely happy with our "BS" performance.
    - spudlyo 12y ago
      Obvious troll is obvious. MySQL professional here. I'm quite pleased with Oracle's 5.5 and 5.6 releases, and feel that they're doing a pretty good job. While they've not been perfect stewards, I feel they have done better than Sun -- perhaps you don't remember the fiasco that was the 5.1 release? I don't feel that this is a trollish opinion. Mark Callaghan, a MySQL luminary who has done a lot of excellent work for the community also has positive things[0] to say about Oracle's stewardship of MySQL. [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7483079 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7483079
      - viraptor 12y ago
        Yes, they're ok-ish. But the original claim was "MariaDB isn't a replacement for the stock version of MySQL". Actually yes, it is. It doesn't work the other way around (for example timestamp column has a different description, so dump cannot be loaded into MySQL). But you can use MariaDB in place of MySQL and there should be no performance degradation, since they come from the same codebase. Reliability was mentioned too - in that case Oracle actually failed by holding back tests. In MariaDB you can reproduce testing if you want. In MySQL not anymore.
        jeremycole 12y ago
        No, not really. MariaDB is completely dependent on Oracle and Percona. While they are doing some good work, they are by no means a complete and independent fork, nor do they have the resources to be. MariaDB is also impacted by the lack of tests, they are absolutely not making replacements for all those tests, and they continue to pull code from upstream. So, same problem there.
        sjwright 12y ago
- stock_toaster 12y ago
  Not quite drop in. We have had a couple particularly wonky update statements with nested subqueries that ran on mysql, but only produced an error on mariadb.
- icot 12y ago
  I would suggest that anybody interested in performance test these claims in their own setup. I ran tests doing binary swapping binaries when the releases of both were around 5.5.34 and in my case MySQL CE had between 10%-15% better performance. When I ran the tests for MariaDB 10.x and MySQL CE 5.6.x the advantage even went further for MySQL with around 20% better performance. I find always funny how with every release you can get opposing claims from each camp regarding performance.
sjwright 12y ago
Our experience switching from Oracle's MySQL to MariaDB was a solid improvement in performance -- particularly on certain queries where MariaDB's superior query optimizations kick in. We've also migrated many tables to TokuDB storage engine, and seen phenomenal improvements in performance and scaling. It's so good we were able to de-partition and de-archive our largest tables with no performance penalty. If you haven't tried MariaDB yet, try it. If your database is reasonably large (10GB+) and you haven't tried TokuDB yet, TRY IT.

Why won't you use the Oracle version? atm MariaDB isn't a replacement for the stock version of MySQL.

by Thaxll 12y ago

Why won't you use the Oracle version? atm MariaDB isn't a replacement for the stock version of MySQL.

MariaDB is a drop-in replacement for stock MySQL. It's performance is actually better than MySQL. https://mariadb.com/kb/en/mariadb/mariadb-vs-mysql-compatibility/ https://mariadb.com/kb/en/mariadb/mariadb-vs-mysql-compatibi...

Thaxll 12y ago
MySQL has years of proved stability, the performance is BS, one graph means nothing, it's like all the people saying they're running thousands of QPS on a server, you just don't know the benchmark and the type of queries running. I can run 3k SELECT in cache... I'm sure one day MariaDB will replace stock MySQL but clearly it's not ready yet. btw Oracle is doing a good job with MySQL atm.
- deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]
- heavenlyhash 12y ago
  My bets are all squarely on MariaDB. MySQL under Oracle is stymied by conflicts of interest. One concrete example is hashjoins, a fairly simple and efficient strategy for many general purpose workloads: MariaDB supports hashing as a join strategy since 5.3/5.5 [1] back in 2011. MySQL, to the best of my knowledge, still lacks any implementation of this. OracleDB, of course, supports hash joins. Oracle has every incentive not to implement hash joins in MySQL because hash joins are one of the performance features that they use to drive sales of OracleDB. [1] https://mariadb.com/kb/en/mariadb/what-is-mariadb-53/#join-optimizations https://mariadb.com/kb/en/mariadb/what-is-mariadb-53/#join-o...
- sjwright 12y ago
  > Oracle is doing a good job with MySQL atm. Obvious troll is obvious. > the performance is BS We're extremely happy with our "BS" performance.
  - spudlyo 12y ago
    Obvious troll is obvious. MySQL professional here. I'm quite pleased with Oracle's 5.5 and 5.6 releases, and feel that they're doing a pretty good job. While they've not been perfect stewards, I feel they have done better than Sun -- perhaps you don't remember the fiasco that was the 5.1 release? I don't feel that this is a trollish opinion. Mark Callaghan, a MySQL luminary who has done a lot of excellent work for the community also has positive things[0] to say about Oracle's stewardship of MySQL. [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7483079 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7483079
    - viraptor 12y ago
      Yes, they're ok-ish. But the original claim was "MariaDB isn't a replacement for the stock version of MySQL". Actually yes, it is. It doesn't work the other way around (for example timestamp column has a different description, so dump cannot be loaded into MySQL). But you can use MariaDB in place of MySQL and there should be no performance degradation, since they come from the same codebase. Reliability was mentioned too - in that case Oracle actually failed by holding back tests. In MariaDB you can reproduce testing if you want. In MySQL not anymore.
      - jeremycole 12y ago
        No, not really. MariaDB is completely dependent on Oracle and Percona. While they are doing some good work, they are by no means a complete and independent fork, nor do they have the resources to be. MariaDB is also impacted by the lack of tests, they are absolutely not making replacements for all those tests, and they continue to pull code from upstream. So, same problem there.
        sjwright 12y ago
stock_toaster 12y ago
Not quite drop in. We have had a couple particularly wonky update statements with nested subqueries that ran on mysql, but only produced an error on mariadb.
icot 12y ago
I would suggest that anybody interested in performance test these claims in their own setup. I ran tests doing binary swapping binaries when the releases of both were around 5.5.34 and in my case MySQL CE had between 10%-15% better performance. When I ran the tests for MariaDB 10.x and MySQL CE 5.6.x the advantage even went further for MySQL with around 20% better performance. I find always funny how with every release you can get opposing claims from each camp regarding performance.

sjwright 12y ago

Our experience switching from Oracle's MySQL to MariaDB was a solid improvement in performance -- particularly on certain queries where MariaDB's superior query optimizations kick in. We've also migrated many tables to TokuDB storage engine, and seen phenomenal improvements in performance and scaling. It's so good we were able to de-partition and de-archive our largest tables with no performance penalty. If you haven't tried MariaDB yet, try it. If your database is reasonably large (10GB+) and you haven't tried TokuDB yet, TRY IT.