I think it would be fair to take into account both the things Colin and Stewart have said as many of them are correct, but their words should also be taken with a grain of salt as they work for the companies that would benefit heavily from having 'their' fork be the replacement of mysql. That's not to accuse them of anything, just to keep in mind when making a decision. The fork that 'wins' this decision might well be the more succesful one in the long run simply because of being the default mysql version in two of the most widely used linux distributions. Personally I don't know which fork I'd appreciate more. At this point here's where we stand with both forks imho (feel free to correct me when I say something stupid/incorrect ;) ): Percona server's direction is heavily influenced by the commercial value for Percona. They implement new features when customers pay for them, and their development seems to be driven by that largely. The community benefits from the 'fallout' of those features being released as open source. The largest benefit is a release cycle that seems a bit more regular then mariadb's. As for MariaDB, I like their much more community driven development that seems less commercially driven, but the main disadvantage is their release cycle: the oldest commits from the 5.3 changelog stem from 2009 (!), and the 5.3.0 beta was released in July of last year [1]. Then again, guaranteed support for 5 years is a good thing. At this point I think MariaDB would probably be a better match for being in the main ubuntu/debian distro's as their whole ecosystem seems to match better. Let it be clear that I have no commercial benefits from either one over the other, just voicing my opinion. cheers, Walter [1] http://kb.askmonty.org/en/mariadb-530-changelog-p6 On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 09:40, Henrik Ingo <henrik.ingo@avoinelama.fi> wrote:
On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 9:33 AM, Bjoern Boschman <bjoern@boschman.de> wrote:
On 16.02.2012 00:57, Henrik Ingo wrote:
Percona Server is like MariaDB in that both of them are compatible with MySQL and you could do a plug-and-play replacement. Percona Server is much closer to MySQL (which many think is great), shall I say more focused. MariaDB has more deviation in the code base and also adds more stuff like additional storage engines (which many think is great, especially when you want to play with new features).
The additional storage engine also applies to percona :-)
Ok, fair point, but MariaDB really goes out of its way to have lots of them: PBXT, OQGraph engine, Sphinx, Aria... You won't find these (unless you contract Percona to provide them for you) in Percona Server. These are not that commonly used but more niche. But they are the reason I commonly label MariaDB as "has more stuff".
henrik
-- henrik.ingo@avoinelama.fi +358-40-8211286 skype: henrik.ingo irc: hingo www.openlife.cc
My LinkedIn profile: http://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=9522559
_______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~maria-discuss Post to : maria-discuss@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~maria-discuss More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
-- Walter Heck -- follow @walterheck on twitter to see what I'm up to! -- Check out my new startup: Server Monitoring as a Service @ http://tribily.com Follow @tribily on Twitter and/or 'Like' our Facebook page at http://www.facebook.com/tribily