Talk:MySQL/Archive 1

message: We don't need to include the brands inside the article.  They are listed at the bottom. - Tεxτurε 00:02, 28 May 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  brands inside article 

message: Given my lack of familarity with WikiPedia and my association with MySQL, I have made a set of suggested edits here, rather than on the main page. I will suggest additional enhancements after getting my toes wet here. --fweep 07:24, 2004 Jun 6 (UTC)
MySQL is a computer software product, a cross-platform, multithreaded, multi-user, SQL (Structured Query Language) relational database management system. MySQL is distributed as either free software/open source software under the terms and conditions of the GNU General Public License, or is sold as proprietary software. MySQL is a key component of the LAMP application stack.
: HP now officially certifies and supports MySQL on some of their platforms. This is the extent of the arrangment. --fweep 07:24, 2004 Jun 6 (UTC)
Unlike other free software and open source projects such as Apache or PHP, MySQL is owned and sponsored by a single for-profit firm (called MySQL AB). The company develops and maintains the system, selling support and service contracts, as well as non-GPL-licensed copies of MySQL, and employing people all over the world who communicate over the internet. MySQL AB owns the MySQL trademark and complete copyright on the MySQL codebase. Two Swedes and a Finn founded MySQL AB: David Axmark, Allan Larsson and Michael "Monty" Widenius.
Despite the widespread pronunciation of "SQL" as "sequel," professionals generally pronounce "MySQL" as "my ess-que-ell," not "my-sequel."
I added a section in the Distinguishing Features section. I think it makes a little clearer the types of storage engines, and that they must be compiled in for 5.0. Primary source for information is . I'm following the  Be Bold guideline, but want to point out that I am currently working for Solid Information Technology, so I'd like to hear opinions about this edit. --Jonathan Cheyer 00:28, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Suggested edits 

message: *MySQL Website
*Debian MySQL
*MySQL roadmap
*MySQL webmonkey tutorial
*MySQL Reference Guide
*fabFORCE.net DBDesigner 4
*MySql Manual on UnixCities.Com
*MySQL Gotchas - description of many features in MySQL, which work as advertised, but not as expected
*PostgreSQL vs MySQL: Which is better? by Ian Gilfillan
* Open Source Databases: As The Tables Turn by Tim Perdue
de:MySQL eo:MySQL es:MySQL fr:MySQL he:MySQL ja:MySQL nl:MySQL pl:MySQL sv:MySQL uk:MySQL zh-cn:MySQL
------
fweep, it sounds like you have a lot to contribute. If you have specific improvements, be bold and just make them to the article page. Use the edit summary and this talk page to explain edits. (Everyone can see the substance of the edits from the history page much better than they can above.) Since you have access to better factual information (e.g. about the licensing) that's the most important to put in, especially where it can be backed up with citations.
My understanding on the licensing issue was that the MySQL client libraries were (in the current version) licensed under the GPL, and that MySQL AB's position was that any application which linked against those libraries needed to be released under the GPL. This is indeed a contrast to some other GPLed software such as the Linux kernel -- where it has not been the author's intention that software which uses kernel headers (e.g.) has to be GPLed. However, it agrees with the GNU Project's interpretation of the license for substantive libraries such as readline.
The more important point there (as far as that section is concerned) is that there was change in licensing -- and that it led some MySQL users to fork the client libraries into the continuing LGPL version. This appears to be some sort of point in the history of it as an open-source project (or, now, a few projects ...) --FOo 03:45, 8 Jun 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: External links

message: The article says: "...Windows 95, Windows 98, Windows NT, Windows 2000, Windows XP, and more recent versions of Windows.".  How many more recent versions of Windows than Windows XP are there?
:Windows Server 2003, for one. —FOo 03:09, 20 Sep 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Even more recent? 

message: How about getting some information together dealing with the history of MySQL.  Perhaps this should follow the model used by the entry for PostgreSQL.  I think it helps with the NPOV all of the SQL database entries followed the same format. --164.82.144.3 21:43, 2 Feb 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  History of MySQL & a little NPOV

message: What's with the new "prominent users" section? Looks more like advertising to me. Also, 
the "with an estimated five million installations" in the first sentence seems oddly 
out of place. Turnstep 13:57, July 19, 2005 (UTC)
:I don't happen to have estimated use figures for the other databases - if anyone has that I'm interested in seeing it added to them. Same for users - it's good to know who's using things, what for and with what sorts of load. Helps to provide useful context. Neeeds a bit of research but if you're after something to add to PostgreSQL in that section, I think one of the root domain servers uses it. Don't know the load, though. Jamesday 14:39, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Prominent Users - NPOV? 

message: The line "various MySQL employees gave what appeared to be the company's position" seems a little unofficial for an encylopedia - we should get the official word from MySQL AB, not unattributed speculation that what some employees say is official company policy. At the very least, an attribution would be good, if even to a usenet post by an employee. Turnstep 11:39, September 11, 2005 (UTC)
:There's minimal chance of an official MySQL statement or press release on this matter, so (unofficial) employee statements are what are available, even when those accurately represent the official view of the company. I'll point to one or some of them. Jamesday 03:30, 13 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  SCO partnership 

message: Just to let you know.  The purpose of featuring an article is both to point readers to the article and to highlight it to potential contributors.  It will remain the feature for a week or so.  The previous feature was Apache HTTP Server Gronky 04:06, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  On [[Portal:Free software]], MySQL is currently the featured article 

message: In the section "Latest production version", the bullet reading "Full-text indexing and searching using MyISAM engine", links to the disambiguation page for "index". This shouldn't happen. However, I'm not sure what kind of indexing it's referring to, so I didn't change it. Could someone who knows more about it please change it to link to the specific article? E946 06:18, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Section 4.2- Link to a disambiguation page 

message: Hi, I've already started to make a few small modifications to the article. The entire "Criticisms of MySQL" section should receive an overhaul in my opinion. Currently, it mangles historical information with criticism on MySQL AB (the company) with criticism on MySQL (the product). I'd like to add a "History" section and add the historical information related to the product in there. Similarly, I'd like to propose to move historic items and criticism related to the company to the MySQL_AB page instead. In the long run, I'd like to have a more clear differentiation between the two articles. This one should only cover the MySQL Server, nothing else.
LenzGr 11:51, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think the historic criticism of MySQL the product belongs here, though perhaps in a separate section than current criticism. I don't see any edits of yours that I object to, though. Did you change your mind? -Slamb 00:04, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposal: clean up the criticism page 

message: Wouldn't 'mew' replicate the my/mü sound more accurately than 'me'?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.76.110.243 (talk) 13:08, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This should definitely not be in this article, I'm removing the offending parts now. —The preceding [[Wikipedia:Sign your posts on talk pages82.42.176.67 19:15, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pronunciation section 

message: I know the Wikipedia program MediaWiki uses MySQL. Isn't this worth mentioning in the Prominent users section? Or does this break some Wikipedia rule about mentioning Wikipedia? Gutworth 01:47, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Wikipedia is listed in 2005 MySQL Application of the Year winners. Cant see why it cant go in prominent users Reedy Boy 21:14, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

text: I added it even before reading this comment.--michael180 02:50, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wikipedia uses MySQL 

message: I believe that the main article page is missing the Notes and References section at the bottom.  Is this normal? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.153.128.74 (talk) 
:It is becoming more common to have references, but its not necessary. Notes even less so Reedy Boy 21:12, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Truth to be told, it is critical for Wikipedia articles to reference claims, per the Wikipedia verifiability policy. The article currently does cite references, though, using simple links within the article text — having a separate section for reference is indeed not important, although people are encouraged to use WP:FOOT for referencing. If you wish to use the footnote system, go ahead and create a references section. -- intgr 10:09, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Missing Notes and References 

message: I wrote a short tutorial on using Perl DBI at Wikibooks: :b:Perl Programming/DBI - Perl Database Inteface.
Currently it only has one example for Oracle. That's the only DBMS with which i had personal experience.
It would be great if someone could add a section about connection to a free database, such as MySQL.
Thanks in advance. --Amir E. Aharoni 11:20, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  DBI tutorial 

message: The notice on this talk page says MySQL is free.
But I can't see the free offer on the MySQL homepage. Can someone direct me to it?
Nousernamesleft 23:15, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: http://dev.mysql.com/downloads/mysql/5.0.html#downloads -- intgr 05:41, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Free? 

message: I think it would make more sense if the criticism of MySQL's licensing practises appeared under the License section rather than the Criticism section. Any objections? - Chris Wood 14:31, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I have moved the section. Some of the text there is more about history than criticism or license-related issues, so the page could do with further changes. -- Chris Wood 19:22, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  License criticism section 

message: I've landed on this article by searching for MySQLi (redirected), although this page does not contain a single reference to MySQLi. I wonder what it is. --Sébastien Leblanc ( Talk | E-mail ) 08:56, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Its a PHP extension AFAIK. Reedy Boy 10:49, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Where is MySQLi? 

message: As explained in the MySQL manuaul, the official pronunciation is the one mentioned in this article, “My Ess Que Ell”. ( http://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.1/en/what-is-mysql.html )
Quote:
 The official way to pronounce “MySQL” is “My Ess Que Ell” (not “my sequel”), but we don't mind if you pronounce it as “my sequel” or in some other localized way.
So, could we please leave the pronunciation alone?
Jerazol 07:35, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pronunciations 

message: I think this section should indicate whether the GPL or enterprise license was used.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 38.101.0.100 (talk) 16:59, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  MySQL Application of the Year winners 

message: MySQLi redirects here, but this article has no information on it. --208.70.245.209 (talk)  —Preceding comment was added at 18:45, 18 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  MySQLi 

message: It would be nice to see a list of major users. I've seen a document which says   Google (Adsense), YouTurbe, Facebook, Wikipedia and some others. It would be nice to see a referenced list of such users, but not a set of ads for small companies that use it. Drkirkby (talk) 18:20, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Be_bold
peterl (talk) 00:08, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  It would be nice to see a list of BIG users 

message: The article used to say that the popularity of MySQL is "is closely tied to the popularity of PHP and Ruby on Rails". The PHP part is fine, but to say that the popularity of MySQL is tied to Ruby on Rails is absurd. MySQL was a major player long before RoR appeared and today RoR accounts for only a tiny portion of MySQL-based websites. So I deleted |Ruby on Rails" from the sentence. --Daniel Carrera 15 January 2009  —Preceding undated comment was added at 11:56, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Popularity 

message: The biggest installation of database doesn't mention, strange...  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.219.193.152 (talk) 15:26, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wikipedia 

message: Why are there criticism included in the article talking about issues with non-current versions? Most of these criticisms were addressed in 5.0 which was released two and a half years ago? Macutty (talk) 15:54, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Good point. WP:BOLD - remove the criticism! --TimTay (talk) 16:32, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I disagree, this is an encyclopedia and history is actually part of what makes the subject worthwhile of being here. The criticism should be placed into context, of course, such as "criticism of 4.x", but it should stay in the article. Otherwise it's not so much an encyclopedia article as it is a here-and-now MySQL page that you might as well have found on an IT blog somewhere. Ham Pastrami (talk) 09:31, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree with Ham Pastrami. Also believe that having a criticism section is appropriate. 67.189.104.78 (talk) 02:42, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Criticism

message: Two statements in the lead caught my eye:
* "...MySQL is owned... and sponsored by a single for-profit firm..." - if the source code is under the GPL, what exactly does the firm 'own'?
* "...now a subsidiary of Sun Microsystems,[4] which holds the copyright to most of the codebase."  - again if the source code is under GPL, to what is Sun claiming 'copyright'? (more precisely, to what is the article claiming that Sun is claiming copyright?)
Cander0000 (talk) 02:55, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  They own the copyright for all code, and they license this code under the terms of the GPL. This means that they can, if the want, relicense future versions of the code any way they want. This is also the reason why they can have it under dual licenses. (Released code cannot be relicensed though, i.e. they cannot "unGPL" existing versions) --Isaksavo (talk) 11:19, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  Correct Dontdeletecontent (talk) 03:03, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ownership/Copyright 

message: The Drizzle project is not a response to the Oracle takeover. It started in 2008 during the MySQL Conference. See History, bottom of the page, for reference. This is way before the merger announcement. MariaDB also existed before the merger announcement, the WP article on MariaDB mentions 2009-01-22 as the inital release date, whereas the Oracle-Sun merger event dates to 2009-04-20. Hence referring to MariaDB and Drizzle as 'forks in response to the Oracle takeover' is clearly wrong. -- Isotopp (talk) 11:06, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Forks in Response to the Oracle takeover 

message: In reference to this edit, I really think most people's pronunciation of MySQL is more like "my seek wool" than "micey quell." See also SQL#Standardization. Tisane (talk) 06:24, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: But that's not what you wrote; you wrote that it's "my sequel". Which is it? kwami (talk) 08:20, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: SQL is commonly pronounced sequel, and the 2nd reference on the page ( "What is MySQL?, MySQL 5.1 Reference Manual") already shows that. If the reference that's needed is for "micey quell", then why is the [citation needed] mark after the "My sequel" pronunciation? At the very least, [citation needed] needs to be moved so it directly follows the pronunciation that's disputed. 97.112.199.245 (talk) 16:54, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

text: It might perhaps be better stated that those who are less familiar with MySQL might use the my sequel pronunciation. If you view the sessions at the MySQL Conference over the years you'll find that My S Q L is the form used by the founders and those users who have encountered them or other members of the community, with my sequel mainly used temporarily by newcomers. Many of those sessions are available for online viewing if you'd like to check for yourself. The "often pronounced" claim is presumably what would need a citation. Jamesday (talk) 09:37, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  My Seek Wool 

message: Sun Microsystems announced plans to acquire MySQL AB
Probably needs putting into the article ;)
—Reedy Boy 14:13, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  MySQL/Sun 

message: Ok, I'm not sure if I'm missing something here, but I thought "SQL" stood for "Structured Query Language", not "Statistical Query Language" as is currently stated in the last sentence of the first paragraph.
On the official talk page for SQL, there is some debade if it stands for "Structured Query Language" or if it officially has become its own term without expansion, but nowhere in my knowledge or experience is it "Statistical Query Language"
I'm going to update the phrase and link "SQL" to its wiki home --DigitalSorceress (talk) 15:37, 28 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Statistical Query Language? 

message: I cleaned up two such offending threads. Just a reminder to follow both these guidelines.Jasper Deng (talk) 06:39, 27 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Please watch WP:NOTAFORUM and WP:NPOV

message: I would like to suggest that a history section be added to this topic. The seems to suggest that MySQL went directly from its initial development to ownership by Oracle and completely ignores the support and development provided by Sun Microsystems after they aquired the product and before Oracle aquired Sun Microsystems.
jdb (talk) 20:50, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  A History Section? 

message: I only found something like “MySQL Client/Server Protocol”. Does it have a well-known shorter name or abbreviation? (I'd need it for an archtecture diagram labeling the data paths where this protocol is used) :-) --RokerHRO (talk) 12:42, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Name of the client-server protocol 

message: "It is also used in very high-scale World Wide Web products including Google and Facebook."  No source for that?  It's fairly common knowledge that Google primarily (and almost exclusively) uses their own Bigtable instead of MySQL.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.72.137.116 (talk) 12:58, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: At least they used to use MySQL, is there any source that says that Google is NOT using MySQL any more? It rather seems like they use Bigtable for certain, specific services like youtube and google maps etc. I am no expert but it would be great to have a source (either way) to verify / falsify this claim. Thanks --hroest 11:49, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Google uses MySQL for some subsystems, and has contributed patches to the MySQL source. There was a talk by Google people about that at the MySQL Conf and Expo in April 2009, see Availability and Scalability Patches from Google -- Isotopp (talk) 10:42, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

text:  And this in summary means that in fact Google.com does not use MySQL and the search engine (could not even have been done in MySQL anyway) is NOT MySQL. Presenting it differently is a blatant lie Yourbane (talk) 12:49, 19 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Google