September 23, 2008 at 1:32 pm
We are a Microsoft SQL Server shop when it comes to our database systems, but now word has reached the DBA area that one of our top executives is interested in a product that uses MYSQL. I know nothing about MYSQL outside of it being open source and would like to know the risks of using it. Hopefully I can find enough information to indicate it should not be considered for our company. In the meantime I'm going to search Google.
I appreciate your insight.
Thanks, Dave
September 23, 2008 at 1:42 pm
Since there are not many details posted about particular requirements, I would assume that the most danger is in the learning curve of using Linux and MySQL in Windows and SQL server shop.
September 23, 2008 at 1:45 pm
No issues in the areas of performance and reliability?
September 23, 2008 at 1:50 pm
Dave,
MySQL market share is ~30%. It's used mostly in a small Web faced application.
If you are talking about a stand alone application then I am not aware about any issues other than I stated (and it is a valid risk that you should estimate and translate to the budget money). If you have additional requirements, like implementation of MySQL in any data flow, then of course you will have additional issues.
September 23, 2008 at 1:57 pm
Sounds like our DBA team won't be able to offer any arguments against it.
Thanks for the quick response.
Dave
September 23, 2008 at 2:34 pm
The main problem I would see is the learning curve. MySQL can run on windows, but it will still require some time to get familiar with the admin requirements and the flavour of SQL language that it uses.
What kind of app is is that the boss wants to buy?
Why do you not want to use MySQL?
Gail Shaw
Microsoft Certified Master: SQL Server, MVP, M.Sc (Comp Sci)
SQL In The Wild: Discussions on DB performance with occasional diversions into recoverability
September 23, 2008 at 2:43 pm
It's a quantitative analysis application. Our only objection is that we are introducing a new RDBMS into the company and want to make sure there are no major risks associated with it. From a cost-benefit analysis perspective I need to determine how much time the DBAs would need to spend on this RDBMS vs. Microsoft SQL Server, where we already have an established knowledge base. From what I have been told the database is built into the application and there is nothing for us to maintain. I need to see the technical specs to confirm that, however. My questions are "what about backups, performance tuning, security..." All of the basic questions.
Thanks, Dave
September 23, 2008 at 3:25 pm
The danger is knowledge.
MySQL is used by Yahoo and some other huge clients. Sun now supports it and it runs great in all sizes of companies. It has a modular architecture so you can plug in different storage engines, add transactions, etc.
It's a solid database, but it doesn't have all the bells and whistles of SQL Server (SSIS, etc). Backup / restore work well, various DR add-ons, but they work fundamentally different than SQL Server, so you need to keep up knowledge in two areas, test plans twice, etc.
Nothing wrong with using it if you have the skill sets (or can get them.)
September 24, 2008 at 8:35 am
Thanks Steve & Gail
September 25, 2008 at 6:12 pm
A word of warning - not necessarily against MySQL, but against applications with 'built-in' databases.
Check the SLA very closely. Some companies say that you have to do everything through their interface and if you do 'real' DBA work it violates the SLA and any warranties. I have dealt with this at other companies that I worked at. One application had MySQL and the other Oracle. We couldn't 'DBA' either of them and could only use the application to take care of the databasess. Want to delete data? Don't use commands or anything else - do it through their GUI or else.
Another application we had at my first job had SQL Server built in and the company had an interface that maintained the databases. However, they were very allowing of true DBA's to maintain the databases with SQL Server tools. They worked very closely with me since they knew I was a DBA and knew what I was doing.
-SQLBill
September 25, 2008 at 10:45 pm
Thanks Bill. I'll make sure to ask the vendor.
September 26, 2008 at 8:25 am
I have to agree with SQLBill, as there are many companies that sell this kind of application and then "force" you into using their contracted services to do anything remotely resembling DBA work, and at rather high prices. Check the SLA very carefully, and if there isn't one, INSIST that one be a part of the contract, and be sure to get what you need from it. The cost to the company to NOT do that kind of due diligence could easily exceed the purchase price of such a package in rather short order, especially if you have to take things to the legal department to get satisfaction.
Steve
(aka smunson)
:):):)
SQLBill (9/25/2008)
A word of warning - not necessarily against MySQL, but against applications with 'built-in' databases.Check the SLA very closely. Some companies say that you have to do everything through their interface and if you do 'real' DBA work it violates the SLA and any warranties. I have dealt with this at other companies that I worked at. One application had MySQL and the other Oracle. We couldn't 'DBA' either of them and could only use the application to take care of the databasess. Want to delete data? Don't use commands or anything else - do it through their GUI or else.
Another application we had at my first job had SQL Server built in and the company had an interface that maintained the databases. However, they were very allowing of true DBA's to maintain the databases with SQL Server tools. They worked very closely with me since they knew I was a DBA and knew what I was doing.
-SQLBill
Steve (aka sgmunson) 🙂 🙂 🙂
Rent Servers for Income (picks and shovels strategy)
October 8, 2008 at 7:48 am
can't remember all the feature differences but Oracle and SQL Server support a lot more features than MySQL. one reason is that both of them have extensions to SQL in their products where the MySQL CEO was always standards only and nothing extra.
the big difference that i've seen is that SQL and Oracle are stand alone DB products with all the features of a database and the application is separate. With MySQL the application has a lot of logic that Oracle and SQL have internally.
October 8, 2008 at 8:00 am
Some interesting notes here: http://www.sqlservercentral.com/Forums/Topic581432-263-2.aspx
October 13, 2008 at 4:24 pm
Hey Dave,
I have a little experience with MySQL. Basically my boss earlier in the year decided that everything should be migrated to MySQL and we should ditch SQL Server. Anyways, I knew that would not happen for a couple years, but I started testing MySQL so we could offer a client based MySQL database.
The GUI tools I found to be quite basic and not great to work with. The database itself has some nice features, but it's certainly not a mature a product as SQL Server.
I migrated a 5GB client database into MySQL and ran various queries and in some cases MySQL blew SQL Server out of the water surprisingly.
I experimented with backups and I am not really 100% sure what I did (or what I did incorrectly), but the backup was nothing more than insert statements in plain text.
It's kind if died off now that SQL Server lisencing is no longer an issue, but I do see the client side database project croping up again next year. Is it a product I am interested in learning? Sure thing. I'll happily take some time out to learn it.
But, it's still a long way behind SQL Server. A long, long way.
Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 46 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply