Comments - Why does MariaDB 10.2 use InnoDB instead of XtraDB?
Content reproduced on this site is the property of its respective owners,
and this content is not reviewed in advance by MariaDB. The views, information and opinions
expressed by this content do not necessarily represent those of MariaDB or any other party.
I'm trying to wrap my head around this explanation. It's far from concise and to the point. Is this three sentence paraphrase correct?
Updating a storage engine for major MariaDB releases is time consuming, MariaDB has chosen to migrate InnoDB first, and it is complete. MariaDB has determined that migrating a second similar storage engine, XtraDB, is not worth the effort.
Troy.
Keeping InnoDB (or XtraDB) up to date with MySQL (Percona) is a complex task. It took us more than half a year to migrate from InnoDB-5.6 to InnoDB-5.7 in 10.2. Doing it again for XtraDB would've required few more months (although less than half a year). For us to embark on such project, it must be bringing significant benefits to our users.
XtraDB had many great improvements over InnoDB in 5.1 and 5.5. But over time MySQL has implemented them all (or almost all), now InnoDB has caught up and XtraDB is only marginally better. Not enough to justify a multi-month merge that would delay 10.2-GA for everyone.