[Info-vax] Other than Oracle, What MySQL/DBMS options are there for OpenVms?

[Jan-Erik Söderholm]

Den 2019-03-27 kl. 04:55, skrev Dave Froble:
> On 3/26/2019 7:53 PM, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
>> On 3/26/2019 2:46 PM, Jan-Erik Söderholm wrote:
>>> Den 2019-03-26 kl. 19:26, skrev Arne Vajhøj:
>>>> On 3/26/2019 1:56 PM, Dave Froble wrote:
>>>>> On 3/26/2019 8:02 AM, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
>>>>>> On 3/26/2019 1:48 AM, Phillip Helbig (undress to reply) wrote:
>>>>>>> In article <q7c2f5$1jmf$1 at gioia.aioe.org>,
>>>>>>> =?UTF-8?Q?Arne_Vajh=c3=b8j?=
>>>>>>> <arne at vajhoej.dk> writes:
>>>>>>>> Version number wise RDB has taken 23 years to go from 7.0 to 7.3.
>>>>
>>>>> Short term memory fails you.
>>>>>
>>>>> Some may remember the spat between HP and Oracle, and something from
>>>>> Oracle about new versions and support and such.  Now, it was, I seem
>>>>> to recall, about Oracle Classic on HP-UX, mainly.  The Rdb people
>>>>> avoided any issues by just not using certain numbers in versions.
>>>>> They could implement any new features they wished, they were just
>>>>> limited in what they could call them.
>>>>>
>>>>> Don't be so quick to forget the past.
>>>>
>>>> ????
>>>>
>>>> As I remember the HP Oracle dispute then:
>>>> * Oracle announced they would stop supporting Itanium
>>>> * HP sued because they believed Oracle was contractually bound
>>>>    to support Itanium
>>>> * The judge agreed with HP
>>>>
>>>> I do not remember anything about Oracle not being allowed to
>>>> bump major version numbers.
>>>
>>> Well, Oracle planned to issue a "last version" list for their VMS
>>> Itanium products. The Rdb team had a new Rdb version nearly finished.
>>> They released it to a few selected customers, just to be able to add
>>> "7.3" to that list. And after that, they had to stick with the 7.3.x.x
>>> line of versions to not break against that "last version" list, they
>>> were not allowed to release a 7.4 or, for that matter, an 8.0 version.
>>>
>>> This is how the Rdb team presented this on some customer forum.
>>>
>>> Since you're not updated on the background here, you do not know this.
>>
>> No. But I still don't see the problem.
>>
>> Oracle announced that 7.3 would be the last.
>>
>> Oracle can easily change their mind and announce 7.4 or 8.0.
>>
>> I don't believe HP or the judge would prevent them from this.
>>
>> It is an Oracle decision. Decisions can be changed.
>>
>> Arne
>>
>>
> The thing is, Arne, the Rdb people can implement many features, without 
> changing the version numbers past 7.3.  So, your concept of no V8 and 
> beyond meaning no improvements is a false conclusion.
> 
> And Jan-Erik and I have both provided the reasoning behind this.
> 
> Now, you might try to recover by saying that there is no proof of new 
> features, and then I'm sure a user such of Jan-Erik is prepared to shoot 
> your argument full of holes.
> 

One can always argue what is an "new feature", but the documents
for 7.3 versions has approx 100 separate points. Add to that the
points added in the 7.0, 7.1 and 7.3 timeframe. I have not looked.

B.t.w, the latest presentation material is from the US January 2019
presentations, the material is available here:

https://www.oracle.com/technetwork/database/database-technologies/rdb/community/index-101986.html

Under "Download the Presentation Material from the 2019 North
American Update Sessions".

Each one can look it up, no reason to continue this thread here.


> For that matter, bumping a version number is not proof of new 
> capabilities.  Indicative, yes, but not assured.
> 
>