Still, whatever the reason for the switch (is Oracle involved?), this seems like a good new default.
I've found Postgres capable, fast, and rock-solid. (At the point I switched from MySQL, a few years ago, I'd be tempted to say that it had approximately none of those three going for it. I'll be happy to hear that MySQL has improved meanwhile, though: is there any particular reason I might consider switching back?).
"For OEMs, ISVs, and VARs who distribute MySQL with their products, and do not license and distribute their source code under the GPL, MySQL provides a flexible OEM Commercial License."
Given as that's pretty much the only way they can make money, it's obvious they would choose that interpretation (which would be hard to defend in court, BTW).
An interpretation of that clause would be that Apple either has to release Mac OS X under the GPL, or get that commercial license (I haven't checked, but it probably isn't free).
I do not think the GPL license implies that, and as another poster said, that interpretation would probably not hold in court, but why take the risk?
Also, shipping this in the past does not imply they were happy doing that. They might have found the alternatives not good enough before, just like they did with gcc/clang (I am not sure gcc is completely out yet, but it certainly is on the way out)
They would obviously not have to release OS X under the GPL, but they could be forced to release the applications using the client libraries. On the other hand, this has been true for years; this policy was created by MySQL AB, even before Sun bought them.
Perhaps Apple is interested in publishing some software linked against the client libraries.
The MySQL client libraries are GPL, which is very restrictive for a client library. I think that even the commercial vendors' licenses for client libraries are less restrictive.
Whatever are you talking about? We've been using PostgreSQL in production for 5+ years now, and it's been capable, very fast, and rock-solid all along. I've been using PostgreSQL in other projects for over a decade and it's had all 3 along the way, although speed has constantly improved.
I'm all for cheerleading for PostgreSQL (I really love the tool), but that "a few years ago" comment is just wrong and not really very fair.
Wouldn't be surprised if the Oracle issue is involved: they are after all also not bundling Java (which is required on first boot (rumor?) but by lots of software in any case). I can imagine they don't want to mess with possible lawsuits or licensing fees in the future with the path Oracle is on.
I installed Lion a few days ago, and Java is not installed. The first time I typed java (or javac) on the command line, it asked if I wanted it installed - it was then automatic, I just had to wait a few mintes.
Congrats to the Postgres guys. Even if this is for primarily licensing reasons, pgsql is a solid, powerful database that's easily more powerful than MySQL, and is slowly making gains against Oracle. It's underused, and lacking in name recognition, but hopefully this is the first step towards changing that.
Agreed. We're a Postgres shop at work, and the few times I've had to bust out MySQL for a side gig because of client requirements I lament the lack of functions and transactional DDL. It feels like a toy.
Having upgraded to Lion Server on one of my boxes, I found that Postgres was indeed running. Or at least trying to run. It seems that the permissions weren't set properly on the conf file or data directories, so my log was filling up with "failure to start" messages as it tried to launch Postgres every 10 seconds. Even a "repair permissions" failed to solve the problem, and I had to manually go in and change some ownerships from the root user to _postgres.
Not sure if this is just my issue, but if you did upgrade to Server, you might want to check your system's log file.
I wouldn't go that far. I've had some great tech discussions on reddit. Things seem to devolve like this whenever the discussion starts to close in on a topic that any idiot can comment on. There are many of them there, and they do.
I take this as great news. Postgres is my preferred SQL database. I wish I could articulate better why I don't like MySQL as much, but it just feels 'strange' in comparison.
Egh, pgAdmin doesn't feel native at all. I wish there were a Sequel Pro (http://www.sequelpro.com/) for postgres, with a proper Cocoa UI. Once you use Sequel Pro going back to anything less friendly is a real grind.
Still, whatever the reason for the switch (is Oracle involved?), this seems like a good new default.
I've found Postgres capable, fast, and rock-solid. (At the point I switched from MySQL, a few years ago, I'd be tempted to say that it had approximately none of those three going for it. I'll be happy to hear that MySQL has improved meanwhile, though: is there any particular reason I might consider switching back?).