Branches
Releases
|
Version
|
Focus
|
Date
|
|
5.1.26-rc
|
Minor bugfixes |
14-Jul-2008 13:17 |
|
5.1.21
|
Major security fixes |
08-Jul-2007 15:18 |
|
5.1.19
|
Minor bugfixes |
03-Jun-2007 19:17 |
|
5.1.18
|
Minor bugfixes |
20-May-2007 19:48 |
|
5.1.16
|
Minor bugfixes |
09-Mar-2007 18:03 |
|
5.1.15
|
Minor bugfixes |
11-Feb-2007 21:03 |
|
5.1.14
|
N/A |
17-Dec-2006 11:26 |
|
5.1.12
|
Major bugfixes |
10-Nov-2006 13:33 |
|
5.1.9
|
Minor bugfixes |
26-Apr-2006 10:20 |
|
5.1.7
|
Code cleanup |
06-Mar-2006 21:45 |
Articles referencing this project
- Debian: New mysql-dfsg-5.0 packages fix authorization bypass
by Patrick Lenz
,
in Security
Sun, Jul 13th 2008 08:11
- Red Hat: Updated mysql packages fix various security issues
by Patrick Lenz
,
in Security
Sun, May 25th 2008 23:48
- Debian: New mysql-dfsg-5.0 packages fix several vulnerabilities
by Patrick Lenz
,
in Security
Thu, Jan 31st 2008 15:18
- Debian: New mysql-dfsg-5.0 packages fix several vulnerabilities
by Patrick Lenz
,
in Security
Tue, Jan 8th 2008 07:00
- Red Hat: Updated mysql packages fix several security issues
by Patrick Lenz
,
in Security
Thu, Dec 27th 2007 14:32
|
|
Comments
[»]
Simple
by D-Man - Dec 21st 2006 07:12:58
MySQL is generally simple. The question is often about how far you can
reach.
[reply]
[top]
[»]
Re: Simple
by Dmitry - May 15th 2007 07:50:30
> MySQL is generally simple. The question
> is often about how far you can reach.
It's simple for using, but it's very features rich DB
[reply]
[top]
[»]
Re: Simple
by statisa - May 23rd 2007 14:41:45
Agree. And it's very nice when it comes to performance, too (at least in
most cases).
[reply]
[top]
[»]
Re: Simple
by VKT - Jul 1st 2007 00:56:36
Yes, but... Sometimes it is interesting to make something using just the
HTML, even no pictures. Have you ever think about this?
--
That's all...
[reply]
[top]
[»]
Great for beginners
by torson - Dec 18th 2006 14:54:37
I start with mysql without any knowlegde of sql. It is very easy to
administrate especially by using the addons
[reply]
[top]
[»]
Re: Great for beginners
by CoderGuy - Jun 8th 2007 22:31:16
> I start with mysql without any knowlegde
> of sql. It is very easy to administrate
> especially by using the addons
Saved me light years on that aspect as well. We incorporated it when we
expanded our business, and it went very smooth. Now in terms of the rest
of the growing pain issues that come along with expansion...that's another
story =)
--
"Suicide Hotline, please hold" Translation = You're hosed~
[reply]
[top]
[»]
Great Database
by Marcus Moll - Oct 19th 2006 05:36:00
Mysql 5 isn't my favorite cause Mysql4 still is ;-)
[reply]
[top]
[»]
Re: Great Database
by Alex.Kas - Jan 30th 2007 08:02:52
> Mysql 5 isn't my favorite cause Mysql4
> still is ;-)
Sure, more stable as i think
[reply]
[top]
[»]
Re: Great Database
by Flux - Sep 10th 2007 13:39:22
>
> % Mysql 5 isn't my favorite cause
> Mysql4
> % still is ;-)
>
>
> Sure, more stable as i think
Mysql5 is better than Mysql4.
--
All right.
[reply]
[top]
[»]
Re: Great Database
by endless552001 - Mar 14th 2007 21:52:40
Now MySQL 5 becomes more stable than MySQL 4. I like both, but mostly use
MySQL 5.
[reply]
[top]
[»]
Re: Great Database
by Alexei A. Korolev - Mar 25th 2007 15:36:00
> Now MySQL 5 becomes more stable than
> MySQL 4. I like both, but mostly use
> MySQL 5.
mysql 5 have better string support. when I rewrote abit wordpress engine
on my blog, full search operation start run mcuh faster.
[reply]
[top]
[»]
Re: Great Database
by manuel - May 17th 2007 08:27:34
Mysql 5 has some nice new features like "MATCH". Don't saw any downsides
yet!
[reply]
[top]
[»]
Testing Purposes
by jon davis - Aug 10th 2006 17:36:19
Great database great for testing
[reply]
[top]
[»]
Mysql on FreeBSD?
by Alexei A. Korolev - Jul 19th 2006 05:16:10
Anybody have exprience how to update mysql from 4.0 up to 5.x on FreeBSD
6.x? I got errot that this port is absent :(
Alexei A. Korolev
[reply]
[top]
[»]
solaris
by Jim - Jun 7th 2005 23:54:40
Can not compile on Solaris. Has anybody succeded.
--
software development
[reply]
[top]
[»]
Re: solaris
by waclaw - Jun 15th 2005 09:47:38
> Can not compile on Solaris. Has anybody
> succeded.
Did you get "checking return type of sprintf... configure: error: can not
run test program while cross compiling" message?
____________
waclaw [at] z-tales.com
[reply]
[top]
[»]
Re: solaris
by ctools - Aug 5th 2005 03:11:50
> Can not compile on Solaris. Has anybody
> succeded.
I have found the useful mysql manual with Solaris installation notes.
Please the 2.6.3 Solaris
Notes item. I hope this manual will help you
[reply]
[top]
[»]
Very good
by zombbb - Jun 1st 2006 03:51:09
Very good "project". I quote because for me it's become more than project.
Good luck
[reply]
[top]
[»]
A good choice for Data Storage...
by Melvin - May 5th 2005 01:19:43
I stared with MySQL like 6 years ago... While I was using MS Access and ASP
to develop web aplicationes I came to realize that it didn't work very well
with big tables so I started looking for better choices.
MySQL appeared as a good choice: fast, realiable and Free; but by that
time It lacked with a lot of features like sub-queries, which by the way
today are available.
MySQL is by far the widest database server used on the Internet (along
with Apache as the most used Webserver) and I'd like to thank the
developers for keeping this piece of work free, at least for non-profit and
developer's use.
[reply]
[top]
[»]
Re: A good choice for Data Storage...
by Philippe F. - Dec 6th 2005 20:04:31
^^
Definitely agree with the above comment.
Thank you for keeping it free.
--
--
Philippe
[reply]
[top]
[»]
Re: A good choice for Data Storage...
by aliveli - Oct 25th 2006 13:07:16
> MySQL appeared as a good choice: fast,
> realiable and Free; but by that time It
> lacked with a lot of features like
> sub-queries, which by the way today are
> available.
Have to agree with above - lack of sub queries almost made me switch to
postgresql, but now I can continue to use the db-engine I've gotten used
to.
--
http://www.ehdokas.fi/
[reply]
[top]
[»]
MySQL 5
by Thomas M. - Apr 26th 2005 05:42:10
I am really looking forward to a stable release of MySQL 5. It will
finally allow me to use views and stored procedures with my favourite DBMS.
Tom
[reply]
[top]
[»]
Re: MySQL 5
by vint - Jan 31st 2006 01:12:35
> I am really looking forward to a stable release of MySQL 5.
I already use it and it enaugh stable.
[reply]
[top]
[»]
Re: MySQL 5
by Jeremy - Sep 13th 2006 15:42:29
> I am really looking forward to a stable
> release of MySQL 5. It will finally
> allow me to use views and stored
> procedures with my favourite DBMS. Tom
I really like 5.0s text_field search... seems to really speed things up
over the 4.0 tree Jeremy
[reply]
[top]
[»]
MySQL
by sid007 - Dec 4th 2004 12:11:13
MySQL is by far the worlds most popular opensource database. MySQLHosting and more info also avail.
here MySQL
information
--
FavWebLinks
Affordable Web Hosting
Free Web Templates
[reply]
[top]
[»]
Time tested greatest db
by Nicole Jackson - Aug 25th 2004 18:49:12
I love mysql. Thank you for making such a great database!
[reply]
[top]
[»]
Re: Time tested greatest db
by PsSky - Apr 6th 2005 05:48:09
I love mysql too! And I’m really happy that starting with version 5.0 mysql
supports stored procedures and functions and now it’s fully
functional opensource sql server.
> I love mysql. Thank you for making such
> a great database!
--
Webmaster Kit
[reply]
[top]
[»]
Re: Time tested greatest db
by planetandrea - Aug 25th 2005 16:15:54
4.1.1 has fixed a long issue I have had with memory leaks. Thanks and great
work!
--
Andrea
planetandrea.com
[reply]
[top]
[»]
Re: Time tested greatest db
by Veerakumar - May 18th 2005 23:56:29
> I love mysql. Thank you for making such
> a great database!
I also like it very much. Such a professional db for free great. Plus it's
gets good with each new release.
--
Visit me at Veera
[reply]
[top]
[»]
Re: Time tested greatest db
by jon davis - Aug 10th 2006 17:30:25
> I agree I love mysql. Thank you for making such
> a great database!
database for the massess
[reply]
[top]
[»]
Re: Time tested greatest db
by spondishy - Jan 24th 2008 09:17:58
>
> % I agree I love mysql. Thank you for
> making such
> % a great database!
>
> database for the massess
>
>
Yep... I use SQL Server in my role, but MySQL on my hobby sites. I've had
no problems performance wise. Great product. Thanks.
--
Orlando Visiting
[reply]
[top]
[»]
Thanks for the Great DB
by Plutoid - Jun 18th 2003 23:24:20
I was amazed at how easy MySql was to install and use. I was going to
install Oracle but then had a lot of java issues and I just ran apt-get
install mysql* instead and was running in minutes. Thanks guys for the
great efforts.
jake@plutoid.com
[reply]
[top]
[»]
Broken on Solaris
by Shaman - Oct 16th 2001 14:03:29
Hours and hours of trying to compile anything
post 3.23.36 have failed for me, using a variety
of compilers including EGCS, GCC and SUN C.
I've changed my /usr/local/lib contents, added
NCurses, tried different readline libraries (and no
system readline), attempted static builds... all to
no avail.
So what's the deal, will MySQL ever compile on
Solaris UNIX anymore?
[reply]
[top]
[»]
Re: Broken on Solaris
by Buy Gifts - Sep 16th 2004 01:42:10
> Hours and hours of trying to compile
> anything
> post 3.23.36 have failed for me, using a
> variety
> of compilers including EGCS, GCC and SUN
> C.
> I've changed my /usr/local/lib contents,
> added
> NCurses, tried different readline
> libraries (and no
> system readline), attempted static
> builds... all to
> no avail.
>
> So what's the deal, will MySQL ever
> compile on
> Solaris UNIX anymore?
>
I have had the same issues compiling MySQL on Sloaris as well. After
trying for so long i just gave up on it.
--
Digital Cameras - Biz
[reply]
[top]
[»]
Am I right????
by Pablo Fernández - Apr 30th 2001 11:06:14
I was surprised when I find out that MySQL, the well known, full featured,
extended and stable database DOESN'T HAS A C API!!!!!!!
This is a big big big weakness, do u guys know if there's any effort to
build one?
[reply]
[top]
[»]
Re: Am I right????
by David Axmark - May 1st 2001 02:29:47
> I was surprised when I find out that
> MySQL, the well known, full featured,
> extended and stable database DOESN'T HAS
> A C API!!!!!!!
MySQL has had a C API since day 1. See
http://www.mysql.com/documentation/mysql/bychapter/manual_Clients.html#C
/David
--
David Axmark, MySQL AB
[reply]
[top]
[»]
Re: Am I right????
by Eelco van Beek - Jul 7th 2001 14:07:53
There is a C-api. It's only a bit poor that the authors change things
without notifying about it in the changelog. For instance, it's no longer
allowed to dbselect after a realconnect. This was allowed in a previous
version.
> I was surprised when I find out that
> MySQL, the well known, full featured,
> extended and stable database DOESN'T HAS
> A C API!!!!!!!
> This is a big big big weakness, do u
> guys know if there's any effort to build
> one?
[reply]
[top]
[»]
Re: Am I right????
by Sasha Pachev - Jul 11th 2001 23:39:56
> There is a C-api. It's only a bit poor
> that the authors change things without
> notifying about it in the changelog. For
> instance, it's no longer allowed to
> dbselect after a realconnect. This was
> allowed in a previous version.
You must be confusing this with something else.
mysql_select_db() is allowed any time after
mysql_real_connect(). If you find a behaviour in
MySQL client library that you think is wrong, submit
a bug report with a test case to
bugs@lists.mysql.com.
--
Sasha Pachev -- MySQL Development Team
[reply]
[top]
[»]
23.34a
by Shaman - Mar 13th 2001 10:00:51
BEWARE!
This thing has been falling over on me! I'm going back to 23.33 which has
been 100% stable with hundreds of millions of requests.
(tried recompiling, no diff)
[reply]
[top]
[»]
MySQL license
by Florin Andrei - Jan 19th 2001 13:13:08
Yes, they had a non-GNU license, but the situation changed. MySQL is
now under true GPL. Read the appropriate files in the distribution before
making public statements...
[reply]
[top]
[»]
Version 3.23.36 is really 3.23.26
by Göran Öberg - Oct 19th 2000 07:07:40
The announced version is really 3.23.26, not 3.23.36.
The 3.23 branch is still
in beta so the official name of this version is 3.23.26-beta. This
is however, as many of you know, a real good old school beta. Not a
"it might work, at least it compiles almost cleanly"-beta, but rather a
"works really fine but haven't around and through all the
motions enough to be considered stable"-beta... (-:
[reply]
[top]
[»]
RE: Consider PostgreSQL
by VR Link - Jun 3rd 2000 23:53:48
Even if I had to hack (read add/modify) two lines of assembler code and a
few more in the generated Makefiles to get PostgreSQL up and running on
Irix 6.3 using gcc-2.95.2, it's much more featured than MySQL, so the "One
only problem with that theory" message is quite out of the question.
Also, MySQL doesn't know anything about foreign keys or relational
integrity, and if you will need a join of more than 3 tables you'll have to
consider doing that with a external (perl, java, whatever) script/program
instead of a single "select" query. It also lacks support for quite big
tables (I think its limit is about 2GB for the use I've made of it)
Anyways, if you *know* your needs are quite simple in terms of queries
and that you will NOT need either tables with lots of indexes or tables
which will require too much space in your filesystem. I would also
recommend it to anyone whose best approach to a database management system
has been Micr*$*ft Acc*ss
What did I chose for my needs? PostgreSQL 7.0. It ran flawlessly in
both Linux (RedHat 6.2) and Irix, and the JDBC driver comes with the
distribution, so at most I had to compile it in Irix as I installed there
first. The RPM came with the driver already for linux. Also, now that I'm
trying with ODBC for using my DBs inside StarOffice, PostgreSQL's one came
with unixODBC (just to compile it), and having MyODBC compiled and running
was quite a nightmare -- my very personal experience, though.
[reply]
[top]
[»]
RE: Consider PostgreSQL
by Michael Widenius - Jun 12th 2001 17:57:20
A couple of short comments:
MySQL uses files, so the limit per table is based on the file system.
With modern file systems, there is no practical limits for how
big a MySQL table could be.
MySQL has never had any problems to do complicated joins between many
tables.
MyODBC has also always been available in binary format, so I don't
understand why you had any problems with installing and using it.
--
Monty
CTO for MySQL AB
[reply]
[top]
[»]
Re: Complex?
by Tom Lane - Mar 9th 2000 13:07:41
Just a note - PostgreSQL has gotten easier to install over time. In 7.0 it
won't be
much more than configure, make, make install, initdb, start postmaster.
You can
find the current installation instructions at
www.postgresql.org.
[reply]
[top]
[»]
The MySQL License
by Adrian Lopez - Jan 4th 2000 18:30:30
The MySQL license and the MySQL manual don't seem to be very consistent
with respect to each other. The manual states certain restrictions that the
license itself doesn't seem to impose. I feel either the manual or the
license are in need of revision. As it stands, the manual's restrictions
are confusing, and possibly invalid. Just my opinion, of course.
[reply]
[top]
[»]
Dang... 3.22.29 won't compile on Solaris
by Shaman - Jan 4th 2000 10:00:16
Tried 4 times.
First time I've ever been *not* able to compile MySQL at all.
Even with low memory selected, mysql.cc would bomb with "integer is so
large as to be unsigned".
[reply]
[top]
[»]
Complex?
by jdrowell - Dec 11th 1999 06:28:57
Uhmm, isn't that what winblows users say about Linux? Sure winblows and
MySQL are popular, but for the wrong reasons. Being lazy is easy, but
doesn't pay off in the long run. If they at least GPL the project, I may
think different though. Hell, if winblows itself was GPLed I'd use if to
play games ;)
[reply]
[top]
[»]
Only one problem with that theory.
by Shaman - Dec 10th 1999 11:01:15
PostGRESQL is a bastard to set up and use if you aren't already steeped in
its lore. It's unecessarily complex. This is why MySQL is so popular -
it's simple in design.
[reply]
[top]
[»]
Re: Only one problem with that theory.
by Charles Hagen - Mar 4th 2001 20:06:34
> PostGRESQL is a bastard to set up and
> use if you aren't already steeped in its
> lore. It's unecessarily complex. This
> is why MySQL is so popular - it's simple
> in design.
I am trying to use MySQL for the first time and need help. Can you email
me at chagen@execpc.com?
I am trying to get it running.
Sincerely,
Charles L. Hagen
[reply]
[top]
[»]
Re: Only one problem with that theory.
by Michael Widenius - Jun 12th 2001 17:51:24
If you have a problem with MySQL, you should post it to
mysql@lists.mysql.com or any of the other MySQL mailing lists. If you
want a guaranteed answer then you have always the option to take up
commercial support from MySQL AB.
--
Monty
CTO for MySQL AB
[reply]
[top]
[»]
Consider PostgreSQL
by . - Dec 10th 1999 00:06:20
It's more featured, and is released under a license that's not restrictive.
Consider using it as a replacement for MySQL, and if you're a good guy add
support for PostgreSQL when you write something that's to use with MySQL.
[reply]
[top]
[»]
Re: Consider PostgreSQL
by Michael Widenius - Jun 12th 2001 17:49:10
MySQL and PostgreSQL have different features and development goals. For
some applications MySQL is superior to PostgreSQL and vice versa. To just
recommend one or another without knowing what the database server should be
used to is unfair for both databases.
You can find a comparison at:
MySQL-PostgreSQL
comparison
--
Monty
CTO for MySQL AB
[reply]
[top]
[»]
Re: Consider PostgreSQL
by Christopher Cashell - Oct 19th 2001 12:39:31
> You can find a comparison at:
>
> MySQL-PostgreSQL comparison
This page seems to no longer exist.
One comparison page that I know of, which is fairly high level, but
does provide a basic overview of the "big" Open Source databases (MySQL,
PostgreSQL, SAP, Interbase) is here.
--
Toph
[reply]
[top]
[»]
Re: Consider PostgreSQL
by Michael Widenius - Dec 16th 2001 11:17:54
Sorry for the wrong link; We have reorginized the manual since I posted the
above link.
The right link is
here.
--
Monty
CTO for MySQL AB
[reply]
[top]
[»]
Re: Consider PostgreSQL
by mitch - Apr 25th 2002 13:54:39
I am attempting to evaluate which database I should use for a Java (JSP)
web application that I'm planning to develop.
There seems to be disagreement in the open source comminity over which
DBMS is better; MySQL or PostgreSQL.
Other open source databases such as Firebird and SAP never seem to
feature much in these discussions. Why is this? From what I've read on
their web sites they seem to have comparable feature sets.
Thanks in advance,
Mitch
[reply]
[top]
[»]
Re: Consider PostgreSQL
by Jani - May 18th 2002 14:42:11
> I am attempting to evaluate which
> database I should use for a Java (JSP)
> web application that I'm planning to
> develop.
>
> There seems to be disagreement in the
> open source comminity over which DBMS is
> better; MySQL or PostgreSQL.
>
> Other open source databases such as
> Firebird and SAP never seem to feature
> much in these discussions. Why is this?
> From what I've read on their web sites
> they seem to have comparable feature
> sets.
>
> Thanks in advance,
>
> Mitch
Hi Mitch,
It's not fair to say that a certain database
is best in general, it's always situation
dependent. There is room for all engines.
As a MySQL developer I'm not in an impartial
position to say which one you should use. I
can only say that MySQL is used a lot around
the world especially for web based applications.
We have also tried to make a fair comparison
of different server functions between different
RDBMS at
http://www.mysql.com/information/crash-me.php
and
http://www.mysql.com/information/benchmarks.html
There is also one fully impartial comparison at:
http://www.eweek.com/slideshow/0,3018,sid=0&s=1590&a=23120,00.asp
You may also like to look at other RDBMs home
pages for other comparisons (if any).
My suggestion to you is that try with MySQL and
if you are not happy, try another one. If you
are concerned about whether MySQL can handle
the load and other issues relevant to your web
site application, you may want to check
http://www.mysql.com/company/index.html
for some current big MySQL users.
Jani
--
MySQL AB corporation, software engineer
[reply]
[top]
[»]
Re: Consider PostgreSQL
by Paulo Queiroz - Nov 25th 2007 14:36:55
> I am attempting to evaluate which
> database I should use for a Java (JSP)
> web application that I'm planning to
> develop.
>
> There seems to be disagreement in the
> open source comminity over which DBMS is
> better; MySQL or PostgreSQL.
>
> Other open source databases such as
> Firebird and SAP never seem to feature
> much in these discussions. Why is this?
> From what I've read on their web sites
> they seem to have comparable feature
> sets.
>
> Thanks in advance,
>
> Mitch
I dont know about postgreSQL....
but I have a large ( + 8000000 rows ) mysql5 database,
with stored
functions...
running about a year,...
I only restarted it twice, to update the db version...
[reply]
[top]
|
