I just wasted a day migrating from CentOS to AlmaLinux because on CentOS I was running MariaDB 10, and the AlmaLinux distro contained MySQL 8 which did not support restoring the sqldump of the MariaDB 10 database.
Why would the AlmaLinux Foundation, created because Red Hat (i.e. IBM) has decided to restrict access to fixes to CentOS to licensees, choose to install a database server that is distributed by another multinational with a hostile policy toward open source like Oracle?
MySql was acquired by Oracle for two obvious reasons:
So Oracle could use the customer base information to promote its other products, and
To freeze the functionality of MySQL so it could not longer compete with Oracle Database.
# dnf list mysql mariadb
Last metadata expiration check: 0:59:01 ago on Tue 26 Mar 2024 10:20:55 GMT.
Available Packages
mariadb.x86_64 3:10.5.22-1.el9_2.alma.1 appstream
mysql.x86_64 8.0.36-1.el9_3 appstream
I appreciate that but I was inconvenienced by the fact that the default package has the wrong obsolete piece of software. I personally have been using Debian on all the computers that I am responsible for for 25 years and switched to MariaDB almost immediately after Oracle seized control of MySQL. However my web-site service provider, like most such server providers is addicted to RHEL, and so is now requiring me to migrate from CentOS to one of the “open source” clones. Furthermore CPanel, by default, only supports MySQL. Of course once again the only reason I am using CPanel is because my server provider does not support Debian and makes it almost impossible for me to operate my server without CPanel.
cPanel does support MariaDB and has option to select MariaDB while installation of the cPanel itself.
The problem is by default, cPanel goes for MySQL 8 and migration from MySQL8 to MariaDB is not possible at the moment. You can however sqldump export and import to MariaDB. Though you can try third party tools like CloudLinux MySQL Governor to directly migrate to MariaDB.
Also, AlmaLinux has both MySQL and MariaDB available for use, there is no defaults.
I run Debian on my own computers (three of them), but I need a presence with a fixed IP address, redundancy, and technical support on the Web. So I pay a web server provider. For reasons which I do not entirely understand web server providers have traditionally used RHEL binary compatible systems, such as CentOS. In turn companies like CPanel, which exist to support the web server industry by providing a GUI that even Windows users can use, support only RHEL binary compatible systems. My provider is moving all of its clients off CentOS because of the pending disruption to support, and my provider insisted on migrating to AlmaLinux. Obviously as long as my web server works I do not care which OS they use. I have tried to get through to the manager who made these decisions, but I am as is typical only permitted to talk to low level drones who can only respond “That is our procedure.” I am not criticizing the actual decisions by either my web server provider, AlmaLinux, or CPanel. However I am caught in a rotating blame game where each element of the system blames one of the others, rather than discussing why the specific decisions were made. My web provider blames AlmaLinux. You, who I appreciate are just volunteers helping your fellow users, blame CPanel. I am just looking for a Harry S Truman who will accept responsibility and explain why the decision was made.
As said, RHEL – and hence AlmaLinux – does offer more than one SQL system and none of them is the default. The choice is user’s.
For many components RHEL offers only one option, so for those the choices are a bit different.
In this case the apparent “user” is cPanel, because they have made a decision to install something. “By default” from your perspective. CentOS had the stance that addition of cPanel (or similar product) converts the system to something “not CentOS” and the result has to be managed however that *panel is supposed to be managed. The thing linked by @ankesh is part of “how cPanel is supposed to be used”.
AlmaLinux (project) does not outright disown users of *panels, unlike CentOS. There is some support, by somebody.
Personally, I’ve never seen nor used any *panel, so I might be wrong about them. I do understand the allure of “support the web server industry by providing a GUI that even Windows users can use” but on the other hand things on the “inet” probably need more care and knowledge to remain safe; neat GUI may or may not do the “right thing”.
I am not a “web server provider”. I do use AlmaLinux, because I did use CentOS before, and Fedora Core before that, after Red Hat Linux. I’m just one user that did peek under the hood and have stick to this one brand/family. I do know that other distro families are similar, but not quite the same. I’d assume that at some point Red Hat based distros made an offer too good to refuse, many server provides took the bait, and now continue by force of habit. You know better than me how much it takes to jump to a different distro. (Several years ago some cities considered switching to open source, but the cost of re-educating all staff was found worse than Microsoft licenses …)