Neohapsis is currently accepting applications for employment. For more information, please visit our website www.neohapsis.com or email firstname.lastname@example.org
From: Bill Newton (bnewtonnetworkmerchants.com)
Date: Mon Jul 21 2008 - 09:54:31 CDT
No, its mainly because BDB wasn't very good. Its transactional, but not
MVCC. Take a look at a contemporary article when the acquisition was made :
Curtis Maurand wrote:
> Its mainly because it was purchased by Oracle. BDB provided
> transaction support. Innodb has been the defacto choice for a ACID
> transactions, but Innodb was also purchased by Oracle in its attempt
> to kill MySQL after its failed attempt to purchase MySQL. That's why
> MySQL has been working on their own storage engine as well as the
> pluggable storage system.
> David Giragosian wrote:
>> On 7/21/08, Moon's Father <yueliangdao0608gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Any reply is appreciated .
>>> I'm a MySQL DBA in china.
>>> More about me just visit here:
>> Maybe something to do with this: *BDB support will be removed. * Note
>> as of MySQL 5.1, BDB isn't supported any longer.
>> But you're right that as a storgage engine, there have been very few
>> questions related to it, on this mailing list anyway.
Network Merchants Inc.
(847) 352-4850/ Tel
(888) 829-3631/ Fax
MySQL General Mailing List
For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql