

InnoDB Storage Engine Dropped From Oracle MySQL Classic Edition - dkd903
http://digitizor.com/2010/11/05/innodb-dropped-from-oracle-mysql-classic-edition/

======
dangrossman
MySQL Classic Edition is a non-GPL binary licensed _only_ for use as an
embedded database in other software. It is not the MySQL powering websites
around the world, and not the one you get off your Linux distribution's
package manager.

See discussion here: <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1868106>

------
shubber
As has been pointed out: this matters to you if you subscribe to MySQL
support. The vast majority of MySQL users who just run the DB on their servers
have nothing to worry about.

~~~
dangrossman
It's not about support. This only matters to you if you use MySQL as an
embedded database in software you distribute, as that's the _only_ use MySQL
Classic Edition is licensed for.

You buy support contracts completely separately, on their support page, not
their product (binary licensing) page.

The FUD today on HN regarding MySQL is just confusing people.

------
IdahoEv
Still, seems like a harbinger of things to come. Soon-ish, I think we should
transition away from MySQL being our go-to default back-end for Rails apps.

~~~
SteveMorin
I know a couple of startups that have specifically chosen
<http://www.postgresql.org/> because of oracles acquisition of MySql. I
wouldn't be surprised if this trend continues.

------
adambyrtek
They claim that "InnoDB is stated to be a faster storage engine", which is not
necessarily true. The most important features of InnoDB are ACID transactions,
foreign keys and overall reliability.

The article also says "There is another option called NoSQL which is primarily
meant for applications that have to scale on the cloud", which doesn't really
mean anything. Not to mention that it suggests that NoSQL is a single
technology or product.

Overall the article is an example of a very poor journalism.

