Morgan Tocker (mtocker) wrote,
Morgan Tocker

There's nothing point one about 5.1

MySQL 5.1 is GA. Yay!

A lot of new features have been added, and the numbering convention of just adding a .1 doesn't really explain that. If I had of numbered it, I probably would have called it "6.0".

In some ways MySQL has done both themselves (and DBAs) a small injustice. While working at MySQL I met a lot of customers that tended to be conservative - they don't install first releases, but instead wait for the second release[1].

In the case of 5.1, just be aware that there will be quite a few more features, and with it will be more bugs. I think it's more stable than 5.0 - but you will still need to do plenty of testing.

I'm happy to see it finally released though - 3 years in the making!

But again if I had it my way, it would have been good to see a real "Point 1" release to 5.0. There were a lot of new features introduced in late 2005 that only required small addition. Changes that were large enough that the current 'no new features in a GA release' rule restricted, but not big enough to break 99% of applications[2].

I can only hope that 6.0 is 5.1's "point 1 release", and not just a deluge of new features 2 years late. Partitioning could be awesome if things like the "can't mix storage engine" limitation were lifted. Quickly.

I probably will be waiting at least until Percona and OurDelta update to 5.1 GA, and perhaps another month after that.

[1] I think Oracle causes this - having traditionally offered much stronger second editions.
[2] For example; I now don't have to use the SUPER privilege for triggers, but I still have no way of using SIGNAL in a stored procedure. It's a shame that for both of these the compile cache is still per-connection.
Tags: mysql
  • Post a new comment


    default userpic

    Your reply will be screened

    Your IP address will be recorded 

    When you submit the form an invisible reCAPTCHA check will be performed.
    You must follow the Privacy Policy and Google Terms of use.