ERP Vendor offers to Take over MySQL

French ERP (enterprise resource planning) vendor Nexedi made a public bid Monday to take over stewardship of the open-source MySQL database from Sun Microsystems, offering a symbolic €1 in return.

Oracle announced plans to buy Sun in April. The deal has been held up for months while European regulators conduct an antitrust review, which has reached a climax in recent days. A main concern of the E.U. has been the fate of MySQL if owned by Oracle, which holds a major chunk of the database market with its own proprietary platform.

If the deal is approved, it will leave Nexedi and end-users in an uncertain place, according to a letter that company CEO Jean-Paul Smets sent to the E.U. Monday.

Nexedi's open-source ERP5 product is based on MySQL, which has enabled the vendor to support a number of storage platforms and use the MySQL Cluster technology to handle large amounts of data, according to the letter.

But the pending acquisition of MySQL by Oracle "has changed the situation," the letter states.

"MySQL has become a liability to Nexedi. Our competitive advantage in the field of business applications has decreased because of the acquisition of MySQL by Oracle," Smets wrote.

"There are no competing open source relational databases which can match the performance of MySQL Cluster for very large data sets," Smets added. But Oracle's "poor track record" with past acquisitions means "the risk is very high that Oracle will destroy the value of MySQL and of its underlying open source technologies in order to promote its own proprietary technologies, both in the field [of] database and in the field of business applications," he wrote.

Nexedi is asking the E.U. to ask Oracle to sell off MySQL to a third party "which offers reasonable guarantees to develop it commercially under an open source business model." It is offering €1 to "relieve Oracle from what has become both a negative asset in its merger and acquisition strategy, and a negative asset to the open source and Free Software communities."

On Monday, Oracle sought to ease concerns about MySQL under its ownership by issuing a press release listing 10 "commitments" to the database. They include a pledge to continue releasing MySQL in the future under the General Public License, to increase spending on research and development, and to create a customer advisory board. The commitments would be valid for five years after the purchase is completed.

Smets was unmoved by Oracle's gesture.

"I usually do not believe in commitments from companies unless they can be enforced by something tangible such as a contract, a jurisdiction, cash handed to someone, etc," he said via e-mail.

Oracle and Sun did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

The E.U. is expected to make a final decision on the merger by Jan. 27, but in recent days has signaled it will approve the deal.

Source:

http://www.itnews.com/business-issues/11936/erp-vendor-offers-take-over-mysql

Chicago Web Design

EU and Oracle To Meet soon on Sun Deal

The European Commission is delaying approval of the $7.4bn deal because of concerns that the combination of Sun's MySQL database product and Oracle's products could harm competition in the database market.

Oracle rejected the claim that MySQL competes with its core database software and said it will " vigorously oppose" the Commission's objections.

Oracle said the objections revealed a "profound misunderstanding of both database competition and open source dynamics".

The EU last week pushed back its deadline for reviewing the merger after granting a request from Oracle for more time to provide a counter argument to concerns over competition.

The US Department of Justice approved the deal in August, but had raised concerns over the future of Sun's Java software and programming language, not MySQL.

The UK Oracle User Group (UKOUG) has told the European commissioner for competition, Neelie Kroes, that its membership believes the future of both Java and MySQL will be secure with Oracle.

"Oracle, in terms of strategy and commitment to open source, will provide a secure future for Java," said Ronan Miles, chairman of UKOUG.

"Oracle's record of preserving customer investments and support of open standards would indicate as safe a future for MySQL as any other 'owner'," he added.

Source:

Chicago Website Design

Analytics at Twitter

Last week I spent some time speaking with Kevin Weil, head of analytics at Twitter. Twitter, from a technology perspective, has had a bit of a hard time due to their stability issues in their early days. Kevin was keen to point out that he feels this was due to the incomparable growth Twitter was experiencing at the time and their constant struggle to keep up. Kevin was also keen to show that Twitter prides themselves on striving for engineering excellence, the creation & contribution to new technologies and generally assisting in pushing the boundaries forward. Our conversation naturally centered on analytics at Twitter.

Twitter, like many Web 2.0 Apps, started life as a MySQL based RBDMS application. Today, Twitter is still using MySQL for much of their online operational functionality (although this is likely to change in the near future – think distributed), but on the analytics side of things Twitter has spent the last 6 months moving away from running SQL queries against MySQL data marts. This was because their need for timely data was becoming a struggle with MySQL, particularly when dealing with very large data volumes and complicated queries. For Web 2.0 the ability to understand, quantify and make timely predictions from user behavior is very much their life blood. When Kevin arrived at Twitter 6 months ago he was tasked with changing the way Twitter analyzed their data. Now the bulk of their analytics is executed using a Hadoop platform with Pig as the “querying language”.

Hadoop is a distributed shared-nothing cluster which locates data throughout the cluster using a virtualized file system. What has made Hadoop particularly popular for large scale deployment is the comparative ease of writing distributed functions through a process known as map/reduce. Map/reduce hides much of the complexity of running distributed functions, even when running over a very large numbers of nodes. This allows the developer to focus on their “application logic” rather than worrying about specifics of the execution process (Hadoop handles distribution of execution, node failures, etc). But in saying this, expressing complicated application logic directly in map/reduce functions can become quite laborious as many pipelined map/reduce functions may be required to take raw data through to a useful processed result. Because of this complexity several higher level scripting languages have appeared to abstract this.

Pig is one such scripting language for Hadoop. Pig takes the developers requirement expressed in the script and produces the underlying map-reduce jobs that are executed on Hadoop. This abstraction is incredibly important as without it the complexity of expressing difficult analytical ‘queries’ directly in map/reduce would be highly time consuming & error prone. This can be thought of as being similar to the way SQL is a higher level abstraction language that hides all the query plan routines (written in C) that operate on the data in a traditional RDBMS. Of course abstraction provides increased efficiency in creating analytical routines, but comes at a performance cost. Kevin quantified his experience, he found typically a Pig script is 5% of the code of native map/reduce written in about 5% of the time. However, queries typically take between 110-150% the time to execute that a native map/reduce job would have taken. But of course, if there is a routine that is highly performance sensitive they still have the option to hand-code the native map/reduce functions directly.

Ok, so why use Hadoop and Pig instead of more traditional approach like an MPP RDBMS? Kevin explained that there were a few reasons for this. Firstly Twitter, like many Web 2.0 companies, is committed to open source and likes to use software that has a low entry cost but also allows them to contribute to the code base. Kevin mentioned that Twitter did look at some of the open source MPP RDBMS platforms but were less than convinced of their ability to scale to meet their needs at the time. And the second reason is exactly that, scale. Twitter is understandably coy on their exact numbers, but they have hundreds of Terabytes of data (but less than a Petabyte) and one could assume that to get reasonable performance they are running Hapdoop on a few dozen nodes (this is a guess, Twitter didn’t say). As they grow analytics will become more important to their business, this may expand to hundreds (or thousands) of nodes. A “few hundred” nodes is right on the upper limit on what is possible today with the world’s most advanced MPP RBDMS’s. Hapdoop clusters, on the other hand, grow well into the hundreds and even the thousands of nodes (e.g. at Google, Facebook etc).

So Hadoop was the platform choice, but why Pig? There are other “analytical” scripting languages that sit over Hadoop, notably Hive which was popularized by Facebook (Pig was popularized by Yahoo). On discussing the merits of Pig vs Hive it became apparent that Hive was more in tune with a traditional approach (“database like”). Hive requires data to be mapped to a given structure and the queries (using a SQL like derivative) are submitted against that schema. Pig on the other hand is less prescriptive in terms of schema and individual queries can define the structure of the data for that execution. In addition, Pig is more of a “procedural” language allowing the complicated data flow process to be more easily controlled and understood by the developers.

So, as mentioned, Hapdoop is a batch based job processing platform. Jobs (in this case map/reduce jobs generated from the Pig queries) are submitted and results are returned sometime in the future. Exactly when in the future varies from a few minutes (e.g. they run jobs hourly which only take a few minutes to run) through to many hours for jobs that run over much larger sets of data. This leaves a gap in “near real-time” analytics between the lightweight queries they can run on the transactional system and the more intense Hadoop based analytics. This has been a space that Twitter has been investigating solutions to fill. This space will be used for things like improved abuse detection, issue analysis and so on. Twitter is currently considering their data platform options here including Cassandra, HBase and may even decide to use a closed sourced MPP solution to fill this need (I can’t say what, sorry) due to the lack of suitable open source MPP alternatives.

For more technical info on Twitters use of Hadoop and Pig you can check out Kevin’s slide deck from the recent NoSQL East conference.


Source:

http://blog.tonybain.com/tony_bain/2009/11/analytics-at-twitter.html

Web Designers Chicago

Oracle's Sun Deal: Oracle May Need to Loosen Its Grip

When Oracle announced its $7.4 billion acquisition of Sun Microsystems in April, the software behemoth was acting on a grand vision. The deal was part of Oracle's aim to become a soup-to-nuts supplier of everything companies need to run their computer systems, from chips and operating systems to databases and business programs. The grand plan may need some revision.

In order to alleviate pressure from European Union regulators worried about Oracle's (ORCL) growing power, Oracle may be forced to give up some control of a key aspect of the deal: the open-source MySQL database software owned by Sun.

The EU on Nov. 9 formally objected to Oracle’s acquisition of Sun. A Sun regulatory filing said the EU believes Oracle’s ownership of MySQL would have “potential negative effects on competition” in the $19 billion-a-year database market. SUnN (JAVA) makes computer systems and software including the Java programming language and MySQL database, a kind of electronic filing system.

"Taking a Tough Stance"

MySQL, available free of charge, runs the Web sites of some of the Internet's biggest brands. Among them: Twitter, Facebook, Google (GOOG), and Yahoo (YHOO). "They're taking a tough stance because 10 years down the road this could be a pretty big competitor to Oracle," says a securities analyst who asked not to be named because he was expressing personal views on the deal.

After saying in September that it's looking into aspects of the deal, Europe's more formal objection to Oracle's acquisition of Sun sets the stage for negotiations on how to make the deal pass muster. Regulators may ask Oracle to release a new version of MySQL that it doesn't control to preserve competition. Sun bought MySQL for $1 billion in 2008.

Oracle declined to comment for this article, but issued a statement Nov. 9 that said the EU’s objection "reveals of profound misunderstanding of both database competition and open-source dynamics…Because MySQL is open source, it cannot be controlled by anyone," Oracle said.

MySQL is distributed under an open-source licensing agreement, which lets users freely modify its code, companies including Google, Amazon.com (AMZN), and a software development project called Drizzle that's staffed partly with Sun employees, have already modified the database or incorporated it into commercial products without buying an officially supported version from Sun. For example, Amazon.com on Oct. 27 announced that customers can rent the MySQL database from Amazon over the Internet, paying by how much data they store and transfer. Google maintains its own version of MySQL, too.

The EU Is Positioning Itself

The presence of these versions in the wild suggests that forcing Oracle to spin out yet another version of the software may be redundant. "The remedy's already there," says one industry executive familiar with the EU's thinking, who says a regulated new version of the software would have little impact on the way companies license and use MySQL, which is prized for its speed and adaptability to running large Web sites. "The vast majority of the installed base isn't controlled by the vendor…I'm at a loss why any other remedies would be needed," this person says. "There's something illogical in the whole thing."

Whatever the proposed concessions, even Oracle's competitors believe the Sun deal will get done. "They're doing what the EU always does—making provocative statements," says an executive at an Oracle competitor. Analysts say the EU wants to position itself as an advocate for technologies that are more open rather than proprietary—closely guarded by license owners.

Source:

http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/nov2009/tc2009118_559520.htm

Chicago Web Site Design Company