What’s in a new name

Also in the MySQL Press Releases today but dated for tomorrow is Sun Microsystems Announces MySQL 5.1 .

I find the wording clearly a new language from my previous understanding — “pending general availability of MySQL™ 5.1″.

We now see the trademark notice, obviously a Sun influence.
We now have a “pending” GA version. MySQL is obviously very keen to release MySQL 5.1 for GA. This was expected at last years’ MySQL conference. Many in the past year have expected this prior to this year’s conference (we are now being informed late Q2 2008). There was an anticipation there would be two RC versions, this is now the third. So what exactly does “pending” mean? Will 5.1.24 be renamed Production if it passes community acceptance (I say community because it’s not an Enterprise release). This would be a change from previous naming policy. What’s most likely is hopefully they release 5.1.25 as production. Comes back then to why the words “pending general availability”, and not “next release candidate” which is what it is.

Previously MySQL also made new with the initial RC status of 5.1, moving away from the previously policy.

Tagged with: Databases MySQL MySQL User Conferences MySQL Users Conference 2008

Related Posts

Creating a More Realistic Benchmark

Common benchmark approaches fall into two general categories, synthetic testing and realistic testing. You have the most generic operations from a synthetic test, starting with the most simple example using a single table, a single column, and for a single DML operation.

Read more

Testing, Benchmarking, Evaluating

Testing and benchmarking are widely used terms in software technology, each serving a distinct purpose and goal. With the increasing adoption of AI in software development, the term evaluating has become significant and with this the re-emergence of what is quality assurance.

Read more

Your Attack Vector Extends Beyond Production Systems

A common data security issue is the unprotected copying of production data to non-production environments without any redaction, masking, or filtering. This practice poses a serious risk. A malicious actor will target the weakest link in your infrastructure, including non-production accounts and the developer systems accessing them.

Read more