<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: MySQL 5.1 is to reach GA state - all to arms !</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.mysqlperformanceblog.com/2008/07/19/mysql-51-is-to-reach-ga-state-all-to-arms/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.mysqlperformanceblog.com/2008/07/19/mysql-51-is-to-reach-ga-state-all-to-arms/</link>
	<description>Everything about MySQL Performance</description>
	<pubDate>Tue, 02 Dec 2008 20:10:57 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Saverio M.</title>
		<link>http://www.mysqlperformanceblog.com/2008/07/19/mysql-51-is-to-reach-ga-state-all-to-arms/#comment-333838</link>
		<dc:creator>Saverio M.</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 24 Jul 2008 14:32:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mysqlperformanceblog.com/?p=438#comment-333838</guid>
		<description>I'm one of the 'gun-shy' persons which considers the current 5.0x MySQL more a beta than a stable product.
To be exact, I reported about 3 flaws in the query optimizer, plus I've found another couple of cases, all in less than six months.

If I'm going to suggest to my company the update to MySQL 5.1, it would be at least 12 months from the official release.
And to be honest, I have the fear the the query optimizer will always be sub-optimal.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m one of the &#8216;gun-shy&#8217; persons which considers the current 5.0x MySQL more a beta than a stable product.<br />
To be exact, I reported about 3 flaws in the query optimizer, plus I&#8217;ve found another couple of cases, all in less than six months.</p>
<p>If I&#8217;m going to suggest to my company the update to MySQL 5.1, it would be at least 12 months from the official release.<br />
And to be honest, I have the fear the the query optimizer will always be sub-optimal.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: peter</title>
		<link>http://www.mysqlperformanceblog.com/2008/07/19/mysql-51-is-to-reach-ga-state-all-to-arms/#comment-332455</link>
		<dc:creator>peter</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 21 Jul 2008 15:54:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mysqlperformanceblog.com/?p=438#comment-332455</guid>
		<description>Indeed. Just in time :)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Indeed. Just in time <img src='http://www.mysqlperformanceblog.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Erik Ljungstrom</title>
		<link>http://www.mysqlperformanceblog.com/2008/07/19/mysql-51-is-to-reach-ga-state-all-to-arms/#comment-332401</link>
		<dc:creator>Erik Ljungstrom</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 21 Jul 2008 09:54:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mysqlperformanceblog.com/?p=438#comment-332401</guid>
		<description>Rather good news - http://lists.mysql.com/commits/50100</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Rather good news - <a href="http://lists.mysql.com/commits/50100" rel="nofollow">http://lists.mysql.com/commits/50100</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Baron Schwartz</title>
		<link>http://www.mysqlperformanceblog.com/2008/07/19/mysql-51-is-to-reach-ga-state-all-to-arms/#comment-332040</link>
		<dc:creator>Baron Schwartz</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 20 Jul 2008 18:47:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mysqlperformanceblog.com/?p=438#comment-332040</guid>
		<description>Unfortunately, MySQL's 5.0 release made at least some people extremely gun-shy.  At a former employer I tried to make the case for running 5.1 as a slave.  I was asked to justify this recommendation and when I said "at least it would give us a chance to file reports on bugs that affect us, so they might get fixed and we could upgrade sooner" it didn't seem to overcome the wariness of a really unstable product.  They explicitly referred to the bugginess of 5.0 as a reason to not be bleeding-edge.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Unfortunately, MySQL&#8217;s 5.0 release made at least some people extremely gun-shy.  At a former employer I tried to make the case for running 5.1 as a slave.  I was asked to justify this recommendation and when I said &#8220;at least it would give us a chance to file reports on bugs that affect us, so they might get fixed and we could upgrade sooner&#8221; it didn&#8217;t seem to overcome the wariness of a really unstable product.  They explicitly referred to the bugginess of 5.0 as a reason to not be bleeding-edge.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
