Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Postgres Engine for MySQL Released

CmdrTaco posted more than 7 years ago

Databases 78

SlashRating©
11.9
slashdottit! tm
krow writes "One of the unique qualities of the MySQL server is its ability to have multiple storage engine operate concurrently. Companies like Oracle and Solid have contributed their own storage engines to the open source project. With 5.1 MySQL has added the ability to now do this in a loadable fashion, allowing dynamic engines in the same manner as Apache with its modules. Now PostgreSQL can add its self to the list of databases who have contributed a storage engine to MySQL. I'm releasing today a plugin so that you can now plugin the Postgres database engine into MySQL and have it work natively along side other engines."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

I'm Lost (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18567163)

Is this a April Fools or not?

Re:I'm Lost (2, Informative)

beckerist (985855) | more than 7 years ago | (#18567225)

There are 4 links to corporations home pages. There's 1 link to someone's blog that contains a broken link to a non-existent plug-in. Not only that, I think this would make a much bigger stink if it were real. So, my thoughts: APRIL FOOLS!

Re:I'm Lost (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18567639)

There are 4 links to corporations home pages


PostgreSQL is not a corporation.

Re:I'm Lost (1)

Agret (752467) | more than 7 years ago | (#18570775)

The link to the plugin is working now, check it out [tangent.org] .
I'm downloading it now, it's 7mb but only going 10kb/s so I'm not sure what it'll be.

Re:I'm Lost (2, Funny)

kirun (658684) | more than 7 years ago | (#18567305)

A clue for you:

mysql> select * from april;
Empty set (0.00 sec)

Re:I'm Lost (1)

Splab (574204) | more than 7 years ago | (#18567515)

Also the fact that Brian has a blackhole engine running next to the pgsql.

Re:I'm Lost (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18567599)

The blackhole engine is real..

Re:I'm Lost (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18571071)

The blackhole engine throws away all data sent to it. It's useful in backup and multi-level replication setups because it does write to the binary log which records all changes to data. Also handy for benchmarking database overhead above the storage engine layer.

BUT... (5, Funny)

dark_15 (962590) | more than 7 years ago | (#18567169)

Will it blend?

Re:BUT... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18567189)

That is the question ...

Re:BUT... (1)

Renfield Spiffioso (982789) | more than 7 years ago | (#18567319)

This is database smoke; don't breathe this.

should speed up Postgresql (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18567185)

One of the problems with Postgresql versus MySQL is that it is typically much, much slower and less capable. THis should address those problems.

Re:should speed up Postgresql (2, Interesting)

metamatic (202216) | more than 7 years ago | (#18568497)

Actually, it's a useful idea. MySQL is only faster than PostgreSQL for "toy" databases [tweakers.net] (low concurrency, few transactions needed per second), or if you throw away ACID capabilities.

However, a lot of open source projects use non-portable MySQL "SQL", and hence don't work if you try to use PostgreSQL as your back end. A hack like this that actually worked would let you run crappy open source code on a more scalable database back end.

Re:should speed up Postgresql (2, Insightful)

jadavis (473492) | more than 7 years ago | (#18569041)

A hack like this that actually worked would let you run crappy open source code on a more scalable database back end.

A lot of PostgreSQL's performance comes from it's cost-based optimizer that chooses the correct plan based on statistically sampling your real data periodically. In other words, as your data changes, your plans change accordingly without administrator intervention. MySQL's optimizer is much more primitive.

Also, PostgreSQL has much more sophisticated options when planning, like bitmap index scans (which can be ANDed/ORed with other indexes and reorder the tuple fetching in disk order), GIN and GiST indexes, Hash Aggregates, Hash Joins, etc.

However, if PostgreSQL were just a "storage engine" I don't MySQL's storage API would pass enough information about the high-level query down to the PostgreSQL storage engine. That means PostgreSQL couldn't make good choices for plans.

A "storage engine" with a simple API for storing/fetching records is fairly uninteresting from a database performance standpoint.

Granted, PostgreSQL's MVCC is likely to be a win under concurrent access in some situations. But the wide range of performance that PostgreSQL delivers without modification of application queries (or administrator intervention) is where it really shines.

Re:should speed up Postgresql (2, Insightful)

Master of Transhuman (597628) | more than 7 years ago | (#18568905)

PostgreSQL is LESS capable than MySQL? (Slower at some things, maybe, but LESS CAPABLE?)

Leave the crack pipe at home next time.

Re:should speed up Postgresql (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18569507)

whoosh. as if anyone saying it could possibly get through.

Re:should speed up Postgresql (1)

clambake (37702) | more than 7 years ago | (#18570295)

One of the problems with Postgresql versus MySQL is that it is typically much, much slower and less capable. THis should address those problems.

Yes yes, this is true, PostgreSQL *IS* so much faster than MySQL, that's well understood... But that's just a small drop in the ocean compared to the much LARGER problem about comparing the two which is that PostgreSQL is a relational database while MySQL is a fancy way to access flat files.

13 Meg GZ file no less (2, Interesting)

fruey (563914) | more than 7 years ago | (#18567211)

If you're going to get Slashdotted, posting a link to a 13MB file is a bit risky, no?

Anyone manage to dl it? I gave up a few minutes ago.

Re:13 Meg GZ file no less (1)

BinarySkies (920189) | more than 7 years ago | (#18567239)

Forget putting your own rear end on the line with deploying botnets to DDoS public sites, simply post a link to a large downloadable on a slashdot article and you get a very similar, yet much more legal effect :D

Re:13 Meg GZ file no less (1)

tronicum (617382) | more than 7 years ago | (#18567277)

I downloaded about ~ 300 kb (very slow) and did a zcat on the tar. So far it looks like automake stuff, so it looks like source code.

13 MB is quite a lot if you compare it to 22 MB for the source of MySQL itself. I also wondered that he took "create table april "... as example. That points toward a prank...

Re:13 Meg GZ file no less (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18567321)

Anyone manage to dl it? I gave up a few minutes ago.


Maybe they're counting that only people who actually need to download it, will?

Re:13 Meg GZ file no less (1)

krow (129804) | more than 7 years ago | (#18569193)

Turns out I had not done a "make clean" in the PG directory, so it was a lot larger then what it needed to be. I've updated the tgz with a smaller file.

Seriously though...can someone explain it (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18567227)

I know it's an April 1st joke, but I'm not a DBA or anything close...can someone give a quick summary as to why this is hilarious and people are currently LOL
Are Postgres and MySQL completely incompatible or something? Like a Lotus 123 plugin for MS-Excel or something?

Re:Seriously though...can someone explain it (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18567323)

They're just rival DBMSes, that's all. It's not actually particularly funny.

Re:Seriously though...can someone explain it (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18567381)

The joke (which, like most jokes sounds lame when you explain it) is that MySQL has so many storage backends, why not use another database as a storage backend? Compatibility is not the issue, but rather the odd notion of designing a database system just to store data in some other database system. It would be similar to writing an entire file system that stored all the data in a specially formatted MS Word document.

Re:Seriously though...can someone explain it (1)

Wdomburg (141264) | more than 7 years ago | (#18567859)

If that's an odd notion, then MySQL is odd already. Solid and Berkley existed as databases long before they become options for MySQL table backends. There would be some value to having a MySQL interface to the arguably more capable (for certain tasks) Postgres storage engine.

Re:Seriously though...can someone explain it (1)

vidarh (309115) | more than 7 years ago | (#18568145)

MySQL can already use another database as a storage backend through federation. The "benefit" a PostgreSQL storage engine would be that you could pick and choose whether PostgreSQL or InnoDB, MyISAM and all other other backends fits the requirements of your app the best without changing your database environment.

It may have been an April Fools joke this time, but I wouldn't be the slightest bit surprised if someone actually went ahead and implemented this. There are far weirder MySQL backends, such as one that stores the data in a memcached server...

Re:Seriously though...can someone explain it (1)

jadavis (473492) | more than 7 years ago | (#18574347)

The "benefit" a PostgreSQL storage engine would be that you could pick and choose whether PostgreSQL or InnoDB, MyISAM and all other other backends fits the requirements of your app the best without changing your database environment.

(1) MySQL's "storage engines" cause different behavior at the semantic level. If you change storage engines, there's a good chance your queries will behave differently. What used to work may now fail.

(2) PostgreSQL has sophisticated performance options which *are* transparent at the semantic level. If you add a GIN index, a GiST index, a functional index, etc., then that will not change the behavior of queries; only the performance. Even though it all uses the same "heap" to store the raw tuples, you can even modify that by changing the "fillfactor", etc.

(3) PostgreSQL's optimizer is much more sophisticated than that of MySQL. If (when) MySQL's optimizer chooses a bad plan, it won't matter that PostgreSQL is the storage engine; it will still be slow.

Re:can someone explain it (0, Offtopic)

symbolset (646467) | more than 7 years ago | (#18567573)

This evolution would bring together the legendary speed of postgresql with the phenomenal consistency and standards compliance of MySQL.

Which is to say, it's completely backward -- a fusion of the worst of each.

Re:Seriously though...can someone explain it (4, Insightful)

Just Some Guy (3352) | more than 7 years ago | (#18567709)

can someone give a quick summary as to why this is hilarious and people are currently LOL

Have you ever laughed at a hopped-up Dodge Neon with a whale tail and three rows of headlights? Well, imagine that the owner had found managed to buy a Ferrari, rip its engine out, and install it in the Dodge. It would be an interesting hack, but why not just drive the Ferrari in the first place?

Re:Seriously though...can someone explain it (1)

shaitand (626655) | more than 7 years ago | (#18569077)

Fair enough, why would you put a crappy dodge Postgres backend on a Ferrari like MySQL?

Re:Seriously though...can someone explain it (1)

Just Some Guy (3352) | more than 7 years ago | (#18569259)

Fair enough, why would you put a crappy dodge Postgres backend on a Ferrari like MySQL?

Well, that's not what I'd meant, but I suppose that still works for certain values of "Dodge [dodge.com] " and "Ferrari [tinypic.com] ".

Re:Seriously though...can someone explain it (1)

brer_rabbit (195413) | more than 7 years ago | (#18570593)

nice! someone mod that up.

Colt (1)

Joseph_Daniel_Zukige (807773) | more than 7 years ago | (#18569655)

Friend used to soup up the Dodge Colt, bore the engine and stuff, for a fast quarter-miler.

The engine was a Mitsubishi at the time.

Some guys would pull the engine and mount it on a funny car chassis, IIRC.

And I always wanted to put an airfoil on the back of my Colt station wagon. And an air ram on the front.

Re:Seriously though...can someone explain it (2, Funny)

Iron Condor (964856) | more than 7 years ago | (#18568225)

It's kinda like someone making an add-on to firefox to allow it to use IE as a render engine in a given tab.

Oh, wait...

Re:Seriously though...can someone explain it (1)

turing_m (1030530) | more than 7 years ago | (#18569613)

It's more like a vim (or even emacs) plugin for notepad.exe. Or a lifetime ticket to a well equipped free weight gym included in the price of a bowflex. Or Michael Bay directing a movie where the protagonist goes to a cinema and watches the Godfather in its entirety. Or GWB outsourcing his presidential duties to a random guy on the street. Or MacDonalds grinding up filet mignon to make patties. Or...

The Lamest April Fools Story Yet (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18567249)

C'mon, who's going to believe this one? It's like "OMG Postgres!!!!" No wireless over plumbing. Less space than The Pirate Bay. Lame.

Re:The Lamest April Fools Story Yet (4, Funny)

VJ42 (860241) | more than 7 years ago | (#18567447)

It's like "OMG Postgres!!!!"
Perfect tag! :P

AWESOME fp (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18567255)

A fact: FreebSD [goat.cx]

Mod me up! (0, Troll)

apathy maybe (922212) | more than 7 years ago | (#18567271)

I was going to make a comment about the date and how other people got modded up, therefore you could mod me up. But then I realised that the mods are probably sick of it by now. So, I'm instead simply asking that you don't mod me down.

APRIL FOOLS! Mod me up please.

Eh (3, Funny)

Spazntwich (208070) | more than 7 years ago | (#18567279)

5.1 is old. Wake me up when they've got a true 7.1 setup available.

Can't hold my breath... (3, Insightful)

Epaminondas Pantulis (926394) | more than 7 years ago | (#18567297)

till they release a DBase III engine...

Re:Can't hold my breath... (1)

xarak (458209) | more than 7 years ago | (#18567683)


When I were young, we 'ad a DL/I and a beating a day we considered ourselves LUCKY.

SQL Server Engine? (2, Insightful)

Zebra1024 (726970) | more than 7 years ago | (#18567307)

This would have been a better joke if it was Microsoft adding a SQL Server engine.

Re:SQL Server Engine? (1)

Master of Transhuman (597628) | more than 7 years ago | (#18568919)

One word: FoxPro.

And In Other News (-1, Troll)

coyote4til7 (189857) | more than 7 years ago | (#18567313)

And in other news readers notice that (once again) every Slashdot posting on 4/1 is an April Fool's joke. Since April Fool's jokes arn't funny when you see them coming, no one is fooled. Commander Taco continues to laugh.

MySQL teh suck? (2, Insightful)

Urusai (865560) | more than 7 years ago | (#18567343)

I thought with MySQL going all corporate and proprietary-like, the bandwagon was jumping ship. MySQL always sucked anyway, unless you were operating a flat file type database. In conclusion, quit swinging on MySQL's nuts. Thank you.

Re:MySQL teh suck? (2, Insightful)

isorox (205688) | more than 7 years ago | (#18568775)

The only ways mysql gets into corporate machine are
1) Grass roots simply installing it
2) Snr Mgmt being dazzled by golf and wine weekends

I can get my techliterate boss to point to a costly Mysql enterprise support package in those high up meetings where nothing really gets decided, but decisions float down from, and we are fine to dump Oracle for the latest 2000 queries/day intranet site.

In reality the support will be mostly Usenet, but it keeps the suits happy knowing that it must be good because it has a corporation selling it.

I can then arrange a junket to a mysql training course in some exotic country to teach something that could easily be learnt from online docs, but is ammo to go into bat with with suppliers that sold us a painful system to work with (load data from master on a database with 500MB of indexes and several updates per second is not a great way to ensure uptime, but they won't even entertain the idea of a mysql cluster at the moment. This "system" caused me 2 hours of grief this morning (fortunatly experience suggested that we'd need extended downtime).

PLEASE STOP (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18567367)

All the effort that went into these AF jokes and not one is funny.

Re:PLEASE STOP (1)

SirTalon42 (751509) | more than 7 years ago | (#18568093)

Effort? You seriously think the /. editors are putting any effort into this? Do you think they EVER put effort into /.?

I for one... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18567393)

...welcome our new, more [in]efficient database overlords.

Digg this new rating system (0, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18567397)

Hey . I really DIGG this new slashrating system! It's as if microsoft were in the room show the slash guys how to Innovate. My , we've come a long way. Didn't Oracle buy the mySQL transaction engine which meant mySQL were strategically dead in the water. It's a bit naughty to say that Oracle are supplying a plug in, they just bought the most important existing one to blow mySQL out of the water.

However, I'm sure that the slashdotit is an April fool, just like postgres for mySQL.

As long as it supports Parrot (1)

itsdapead (734413) | more than 7 years ago | (#18567469)

This sounds like the ideal database backend for Parrot [slashdot.org] .

That's the original combined Perl/Python scripting language, BTW, not the Perl 6 virtual machine that ripped off the name.

laugh if you like... (4, Interesting)

doom (14564) | more than 7 years ago | (#18567513)

Laugh if you like, but you can actually do this trick the other way around, if you like:

There's a project called "dbilink" that uses the fact that you can run perl inside of postgresql to use DBI to talk to other databases. You can use tables from a mysql database inside of a postgres database...

Re:laugh if you like... (3, Informative)

dfetter (2035) | more than 7 years ago | (#18567777)

Pardon the self-promotion, but you can find DBI-Link at http://pgfoundry.org/projects/dbi-link/ [pgfoundry.org] and on EPEL for RHEL/CentOS. Oh, and it's not restricted to MySQL. You can use any DBD with a certain minimal feature set, and I'm trying to reduce that minimum.

Re:laugh if you like... (1)

conchur (907178) | more than 7 years ago | (#18568071)

Surely reducing the minimal feature-set isn't a step forward?

Re:laugh if you like... (1)

dfetter (2035) | more than 7 years ago | (#18568137)

> Surely reducing the minimal feature-set isn't a step forward?

DBI-Link adds on the ability to access external data sources for read and write. It doesn't reduce any of PostgreSQL's capabilities :)

Re:laugh if you like... (1)

Master of Transhuman (597628) | more than 7 years ago | (#18568941)

Badly worded, of course, but what he meant was that the number of features the TARGET database needed to be usable with DBI-Link was being reduced.

In other words, he's trying to get DBI-Link to work with MORE databases in the future.

Oh, wait, were you being funny?

Never mind.

When to use then vs. Than (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18567525)

Why can't these stupid kids learn the difference between then and than and just when to use the two.

So often i get turned off from reading /. posts just because of horrible grammar.
Well i guess this is one more reason that the school system is failing in this country, since kids graduate without the ability to communicate in their own language properly, and to think that Americans despise most immigrants because they don't speak english well either.

Re:When to use then vs. Than (1)

ScrewMaster (602015) | more than 7 years ago | (#18568773)

Why would you say that Americans despise immigrants? I mean, of all nations America is the one that has traditionally been a haven for immigrants from all cultures. We don't like the illegal ones, to be sure, but that has little to do with their English (given that the bulk of them can't speak it at all anyway and show little interest in learning.) It has more to do with the fact that their presence here is disruptive and causing major socioeconomic problems. In any event, hastily-written Slashdot posts are probably not the best way to judge a person's verbal skills anyway, although the writing around here does stink sometimes.

On the other hand, I agree with you that America's school system is failing miserably when it comes to linguistic skills. I had a girlfriend who was a college-level English instructor (this was back in the mid-eighties.) A significant fraction of the incoming college freshmen she taught were unable to write in full sentences, and required remedial instruction in order to have a hope of functioning in a college environment. My understanding is that the situation has not improved, and is in fact worse. How our high schools manage to graduate functional illiterates is beyond me. No question the system is in deep trouble.

Re:When to use then vs. Than (2, Insightful)

Master of Transhuman (597628) | more than 7 years ago | (#18568953)

"of all nations America is the one that has traditionally been a haven for immigrants from all cultures"

The operative word here is "traditionally".

Once the immigrants got here, they immediately began discriminating against NEWER immigrants. Look at the histories of the Irish, the Italians, the Poles, the Russians, the Chinese, the Vietnamese, the Middle Easterners, the you-name-it.

That hasn't stopped.

It's human nature - if you're not one of "us" - for no matter how small a set of "us" (down to order 1 for me) - you're bad.

Chimpanzees have better manners.

its self (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18567533)

I believe the author meant itself [reference.com]

MySQL vs Postgres (1)

Redbaran (918344) | more than 7 years ago | (#18567563)

Thank goodness this was just a joke! For a second I thought we wouldn't be able to have flame wars over which one was better!

The only thing worse would be a linux plugin for windows.

Re:MySQL vs Postgres (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18567787)

It's hard to tell if people are dumb or not, on this day... Cygwin [cygwin.com] --

Cygwin is a Linux-like environment for Windows

Re:MySQL vs Postgres (1)

SirTalon42 (751509) | more than 7 years ago | (#18568115)

Actually I think CoLinux (http://www.colinux.org/ [colinux.org] ) would be closer...

Re:MySQL vs Postgres (1)

Lennie (16154) | more than 7 years ago | (#18567827)

You mean coLinux [colinux.org] ?

Microsoft's ahead of you... (1)

argent (18001) | more than 7 years ago | (#18568513)

The only thing worse would be a linux plugin for windows.

Windows Services for UNIX [microsoft.com]

Microsoft has been using this internally as a "killer app" for converting UNIX sites to Windows by not converting them to Windows for years:

http://www.securityoffice.net/mssecrets/hotmail.ht ml [slashdot.org]

Help Needed: Error 2013 (5, Funny)

ballmerfud (1031602) | more than 7 years ago | (#18567619)

I compiled and installed the plugin and every time I try it, get the following:

mysql> INSTALL PLUGIN postgres SONAME 'libpostgres_engine.so';
... where am I? Oh God no. No. NO!
kill(getpid(), 9)
kill(getpid(), 9)
kill(getpid(), 9)
kill(getpid(), 9)
kill(getpid(), 9)
kill(getpid(), 9)
kill(getpid(), 9)
kill(getpid(), 9)
kill(getpid(), 9)
kill(getpid(), 9)
kill(getpid(), 9)

ERROR 2013: Lost connection to MySQL server during query

dept.? (2, Interesting)

The Madd Rapper (886657) | more than 7 years ago | (#18568255)

Is it notable that this story doesn't have a "from the ... dept." line? How common is that?

Re:dept.? (1)

Agret (752467) | more than 7 years ago | (#18570799)

In Soviet Russia department writes you.

this has been suggested before (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18568517)

back when Oracle started buying up the good MySQL backends the some of the Postgres team drafted a letter to MySQL pointing out that since Postgres is available under the BSD license, they could use it as a reliable back-end for MySQL

MySQL gets it speed from two things

1. defaulting to an unsafe, but fast storage mechanism

this is lost to a significant extent when a safe storage engine is selected. it's not at all clear that the Postgres storage engine would be any slower then the others (in fact, since the postgres team has been spending a significant amount of effort to speed it up over the years, it's likely to be in the right ballpark)

2. not implementing the full SQL spec

the second item would still give them a performance advantage over Postgres for the simpler benchmarks, even when useing the same engine (the cost of a connection and login to the database is considerably higher for postgres, which is why connection pools are more important for it then for MySQL)

this is a very realistic thing to do, if this does end up being an April Fools joke (which, as others have noted, is odd, given that it's a 13M download) someone should actually do this some time.

once this is done people could benchmark the Postgres engine against the various other safe MySQL engines, and they could benchmark the Postgres SQL logic (and planner) against the MySQL equivalent.

the idea of having the option for the two major opensource databased to be able to really be compared in apples to apples tests would be good for both of them.

David Lang

Yeah but... (1)

guruevi (827432) | more than 7 years ago | (#18568623)

are we going to have to start using VACUUM on MySQL now?

Re:Yeah but... (1)

turing_m (1030530) | more than 7 years ago | (#18569403)

I suspect that it would be automatically configured to use autovacuum.

Re:Yeah but... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18569707)

> are we going to have to start using VACUUM on MySQL now?

No, it already sucks.

Re:Yeah but... (1)

suggsjc (726146) | more than 7 years ago | (#18569769)

Probably, but luckily Dyson is working on a Roomba killer. At least this way will have some competition in the automated database garbage collection tools.

Anybody see the "Ballmer joins Linux Foundation" (1)

Master of Transhuman (597628) | more than 7 years ago | (#18568965)

story? That was much funnier than this one.

The only funnier one would be "Richard Stallman hired as Microsoft open source evangelist."

(Now I wait for the FSF fanatics to tell me the difference between "open source" and "free" software - because they can't take a joke either...)

Re:Anybody see the "Ballmer joins Linux Foundation (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18569099)

Ok, see, there's two types of free, one is free as in beer and the other is free as in no free beer. And open source is when you get a recipe to make this free beer. The problem is, all the good beer runs on Windows and the other beer tastes like penguins or cartoon characters.

Ok, too confusing, let me try it again.

See, one is free as in beer and the other is... wait a sec, I was promised free beer. WTF?! What do you mean there's no free beer left?! Ok, this is like the difference between open source and free software, and that is...

forget it, I'm getting a beer.

Check for New Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?