0

I understand that MariaDB forked a version of MySQl but is is very confusing to still deal my.cnf, /usr/share/mysql , /usr/lib64/mysql and so on? Are there any reasons, why they did not change the naming on most of those folders? This had been very confusing to me and that is the reason why i have not migrated to it yet. It's either you are MariaDB or MySQL but don't try to be both.

closed as primarily opinion-based by mustaccio, Andriy M, Marian, Philᵀᴹ, Max Vernon Sep 14 '16 at 17:31

Many good questions generate some degree of opinion based on expert experience, but answers to this question will tend to be almost entirely based on opinions, rather than facts, references, or specific expertise. If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

  • Would there be a reason (e.g. "because X") that would convince you to migrate to MariaDB? If not, what's the purpose of your question? – mustaccio Sep 13 '16 at 21:11
  • RedHat ,Centos and Fedora are forcing it on my throat , I usually remove any trace of it and download MySQL5.7.X instead, but i have played with it a little and i was curious why they don't bother changing all paths name to MariaDB. – winteck Sep 13 '16 at 21:27
  • This may have some answers: MariaDB versus MySQL - Compatibility – Andriy M Sep 14 '16 at 8:45
1

MariaDB is a forked version on MySQL that attempts to be a drop-in replacement. A good drop-in replacement should work without requiring a lot of configuration and data file movement. By using the same directories and filenames, it is far simpler to install as a replacement for MySQL.

I haven't tried MariaDB, but I would expect to be able to install it test it, and decide if I want to revert back to MySQL. While I would backup my databases, I don't expect to have to restore my data whichever option I pick.

0

It's to do with clients in all probability.

Many users are often fonder of, and more loyal to, their database clients than to their server.

If every file was renamed, those database clients wouldn't work with MariaDB.

In particular, it is very likely (you'd have to check source code to be sure on this one) that the excellent MySQL Workbench product would fail to work with MariaDB unless it kept the MySQL filenames.

Perfectly logical really - why would MySQL provide any help to their rivals by allowing their clients to work with different filenames? Now, MariaDB could use the GPL'd code to write their own Workbench, but many users are "set in their ways" with respect to clients.

  • Thank you Verace your answer makes sense, but as a consumer why should i trust them? They are marginally faster, with almost the same exact features. My point of view if that if you want go on your own go ahead and do so don't try to piggy back on daddy. when I first tried them about 2 years i thought that they were going to have features such as "materialized views" but i was disappointed. I feel like in the end Oracle will just purchase them and everything will be MySQL again. Just my 2 cents... – winteck Sep 13 '16 at 21:56
  • The company was set up by Monty Widenius as a counter to Oracle's purchase of MySQL. I believe that MySQL had considerable venture capital, so it wasn't Widenius' fault that Oracle's purchase went through. Widenius now has enough money of his own to guarantee that MariaDB will never be taken over - although they do have "Enterprise" solutions that you have to pay for. Just my 2€/100 :-) – Vérace Sep 13 '16 at 22:39
  • At the beginning, MySQL version number and MariaDB versions were the same. All of a sudden MySQL went from version 5.1 to to 5.4. MariaDB however went from 5.1 to 5.2 to 5.3. Now I keep hearing that MariaDB 's next version is the 5.10 which is supposed to be more compatible with 5.7 of MySQL. Now tell me, why are we losing time dealing with this madness? Granted I am a developer not a DB administrator but this is the kind of things that pisses me off. I went through the same thing with node.js and io.js until they realize that they better merge for the greater good. – winteck Sep 14 '16 at 14:29
  • Oracle have no compelling reason to keep in step with anybody. They are run by Oracle - a company not known for its desire to keep in step with anybody else (and that includes standards bodies, other companies, the human race &c.). – Vérace Sep 14 '16 at 17:38

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.