Sun Microsystems has agreed to buy MySQL AB for $1B, giving them additional leverage in the open source community and providing access to MySQL to its larger corporations. The deal is expected to close during the third or fourth quarter. The grand question, of course, is: what does this mean in the long term? Sun already offers JavaDB as a smaller-scale DB (compared to 'large offerings' like Oracle9 and IMS). Is Sun merely diversifying its own portfolio, looking for an additional revenue stream from MySQL AB's customers, or shifting away from JavaDB/Derby? Consider the following quote from Sun's press release:

MySQL's open source database is the "M" in LAMP - the software platform comprised of Linux, Apache, MySQL and PHP/Perl often viewed as the foundation of the Internet. Sun is committed to enhancing and optimizing the LAMP stack on GNU/Linux and Microsoft Windows along with OpenSolaris and MAC OS X. The database from MySQL, OpenSolaris and GlassFish, together with Sun's Java platform and NetBeans communities, will create a powerful Web application platform across a wide range of customers shifting their applications to the Web. More than 100 million copies of MySQL's high-performance open source database software have been downloaded and distributed and an additional 50,000 copies are downloaded daily. This broad penetration coupled with MySQL's strength in Web 2.0, Software as a Service (SaaS), enterprise, telecom and the OEM embedded market make it an important fit for Sun. With MySQL, Sun will have the ability to deepen its existing customer relationships and create new opportunities with companies seeking the flexibility and ease-of-use of open source systems.

Does this sound like a good sign for Sun's commitment to JavaDB/Derby?

I think it is a good move for Sun. It will help get more eyeballs going suns way. I hope that Sun changes the license of the JDBC connectors back to LGPL, or event to CDDL. I can't see why Derby will be affected by this. I have never seen Derby used outside of the embedded java market, where IMO it is a very strong option. Take a look at Oracle they support many databases. Oracle RDMBS is the most popular, but they also bought sleepycat to get the berkleyDB. Making them a bigger part of the embedded market.

They should have bought Postgres...

I agree. Postgres is more powerful than MySQL. Why not bought IntelliJ IDEA to enhance the NetBeans IDE.

They should have bought Postgres...

Well, maybe .. but you can't "buy" Postgres, any more than you could "buy" FreeBSD or Tomcat. In the MySQL case, the rights to the source code are owned by the company, and thus there is an asset. Peace, Cameron Purdy Oracle Coherence: The Java Data Grid

Cameron is a fan of PostgreSql, now I love you even more :) I only heard good stuff about the Coherence team at oracle and tangosol before it.

MySQL Community server is the equivalent to PostgreSQL, but MySQL has a lot more going on... clustering. If the MySQL team delivers on the promises of the clustering, they have a serious product that people will use before shelling out massive sums of cash for Oracle's RAQ. There's more to MySQL than just the basic DB. And the source code thing that Cameron pointed out is probably the biggest element.

Now that its bought by SUN - does everyone need to pay ? or the free community versions still remains free ? About Postgres - they need to do a good job of marketing themselves. PG has been around before mysql was known to anyone, PG has always had a lot of database features which were missing untill mysql5.0. but still Mysql was always popular. All hosting companies also prefer mysql.