MariaDB Reviews

We mostly use MariaDB on smaller systems, not for mission critical systems. For mission critical systems, we use Oracle.

We're using version 10.5. The solution is deployed on-premises.

We're a very centralized operation. We install the system on an application, the application runs the services, and people consume those services. We have three systems running this on the database.

The cost is much lower than other solutions, especially if you look at the functionality compared to MySQL.

The speed and functionality are the most valuable features. Compared to other solutions, there is more value and functionality for the cost. 

The replication is much easier, and I like the administrative portal.

An improvement would be scaling it up to the levels of Oracle, especially when it comes to resilience, so that we can do higher transactions for two databases or power our operation. When it comes to higher availability, that's where it gets more complicated. I think the system needs to be more mature, especially for enterprises.

They could improve the replication rate. I know the connection pool goes up to 20,000 connections. It should be more accessible.

The interface and integration could also be improved.

I have used MariaDB for over one year.

The solution can run for months without any issues.

I would rate the stability as 8 out of 10.

The scalability improves if you use the distributed database. In our case, the performance has been good enough for the applications we use. We haven't had any performance issues to warrant improving it beyond one node. We moved the storage to SSD, so the performance is good from a basic setup.

I would rate the scalability as eight out of ten. It's a little bit complex.

We haven't needed to resort to technical support. Most of the time, we look at the documentation, and we're able to work out things on our own.

I have also used MySQL. When Oracle purchased MySQL, it was split into two options: the official version and the open source version. We started having a divergence in the updates, and then the open source version got left behind. We thought it was too caught up in a big enterprise and it wouldn't get the same attention. It was probably stifled because it was going to create competition for Oracle. We thought that maybe MariaDB was catching up fast, getting more features, and improving much faster than MySQL.

Initial setup is very easy. If you're used to MySQL, it's easy, but things get a little bit complex when you're setting up replication. We can get the solution running in less than an hour.

Implementation was done in-house. We required one person for deployment. They are a database administrator.

One person is needed for maintenance. It's a very economical system. Once you get it up and running, there's very little maintenance needed.

You just need to monitor it and see if the IO performance is good. If anything, you have to optimize your queries.

I would rate the setup as nine out of ten.

The cost is quite good. You can have the open source, free version, which has adequate capacity. Compared to Oracle, MariaDB has a more flexible policy and less officials. Oracle is too big of an organization, and they do certain things that leave a sour taste in our mouth. Dealing with a smaller company is sometimes better, especially for smaller systems.

I would rate the licensing cost as nine out of 10.

We also evaluated PostgreSQL.

With our experience with MySQL, we thought we needed to convert most of the queries to PostgreSQL. MariaDB was much closer to MySQL than to PostgreSQL, and PostgreSQL hasn't moved quickly enough compared to MariaDB.

PostgreSQL is quite high end, but there were differences in the syntax of the scale. We didn't want to be involved in converting the syntax.

I would rate this solution as nine out of ten. 

It has a lower cost of ownership, and you need less effort to get it up and running. There's less effort in getting to know the system compared to other database systems. I would encourage people to move to it, especially if they've already used MySQL.

I use MariaDB in my company to build simple web applications.

The most valuable feature of the solution is its interface, including the web interface and the CLI.

There is no guide provided to first-time users by the solution. For first-time users, there should be some sort of guide provided by the solution explaining what the product offers so that they don't have to search for it on Google. The very first time that users use the product, they should be able to use the database server and move it to phpMyAdmin.

MariaDB's GUI is an area with certain shortcomings where improvements are required.

I have been using MariaDB for more than a year.

I haven't faced any technical issues with the product, and it works fine. Suppose users have some other databases running in the environment apart from MariaDB. In that case, it might occupy the port that MariaDB's server is trying to use, so you might not be able to access it. There are no technical issues related to the solution unless there is another database in the same environment where MariaDB functions, making it an area where users must be careful.

The product has scalability features, but I haven't reached the level where I have to use them. If you know where to change the tool's configurations, it can scale up.

Though I still work with MariaDB, I have moved to Firebase and MySQL.

I have experience with some other tools in the past. The interface areas offered by other tools in the market are much better than the ones offered by MariaDB. The interface offered by MySQL databases is better than MariaDB's GUI.

The product's initial setup phase can be done straight out of the box, as it works fine.

The product's initial setup phase didn't require much time because MariaDB was already embedded within XAMPP, so it was easy to use and access since I only had to launch it. You may want to change the user credentials for the password before you can access it and use it from the CLI.

Price-wise, the product is affordable. The product is not expensive.

I rate the overall product an eight out of ten.

I use MariaDB since my organization has different customers who use different databases. My company caters to the customers' needs depending on the database they want to use.

The most valuable feature of the solution is a relational database, which is fairly reliable. My company is satisfied with most of the features of the solution. My company just provides services to customers depending on what they want, so we don't necessarily dig too deeply into why they want it. If a customer asks for a referral or suggestions for a free database, then my company normally tries to push PostgreSQL, a tool we get directly from the vendor.

My company hasn't seen any problems with the solution where it has been running. The solution works fine for the purpose it is meant for, so there are no issues.

MariaDB should provide HA and archive logging. If HA and archive logging are present in the solution, it is hard to find them. The aforementioned details related to HA and archive logging need to be considered for improvement. I haven't had the opportunity to use the features provided by the solution since I don't know how to see them.

I have been using MariaDB for a couple of years. My company operates as a consultant offering support for the solution.

It is a stable solution. I haven't seen any stability issues for the purpose MariaDB is meant to function.

In my company, the instance related to MariaDB is fairly small, so I can't comment much on its scalability.

For MariaDB, my company has only one customer who uses it for a single instance, which is about 20 GB of data at the moment.

I haven't had the need to contact the solution's technical support.

The solution is deployed on an on-premises model.

MariaDB can be deployed in a day.

My company uses the free version of the solution.

With PostgreSQL, it's simply the archive logging functionality and remote hard clustering capabilities.

My company is not familiar with how the functionalities of PostgreSQL would work for MariaDB or MySQL.

I would tell those planning to use the solution that it is pretty much the same as MySQL, but since my company has dealt with only one instance in MariaDB, I can't say much about it.

I rate the overall solution an eight out of ten.

We use several solutions for analyzing purposes including MariaDB, MongoDB, and PostgreSQL.

Our use cases for MariaDB are 50% for transferring data and 50% for storage purposes.

MariaDB is a user-friendly solution. Performance wise, it's better than SQL. With SQL, I would need to write a number of queries. In contrast, MariaDB is light.

In addition, MariaDB's transferring speed is very high compared to that of other DBs.

The dashboard and pricing need improvement.

I've been using this solution for one and a half years.

For stability, I would give MariaDB a rating of eight out of ten.

I would rate MariaDB's scalability at nine out of ten. We currently have 50 plus people using this solution including middle level software developers and data engineers.

MariaDB's technical support staff have been very helpful, and I would give them a rating of nine out of ten.

Positive

The initial setup is somewhat complex, but it can be overcome by reading the documentation and following it closely. The installation took about 50 minutes. The SQL development team handles the maintenance of the solution.

It is an open-source solution.

I would recommend MariaDB and rate it at eight on a scale from one to ten.

MariaDB is used like any other relational database where we need complex join queries as well as tasks like read and write using the tool. The tool also offers support in terms of sharding, which is why we use MariaDB. Every time we use the tool, we have some kind of a reason, or, I would say, a requirement of asset compliance, which is atomicity, consistency, isolation, and durability, which is only provided by a relational database. Companies usually go towards open-source databases. Oracle is very costly. Oracle is not an open-source tool, which is why people tend to go towards open-source. The databases are doing pretty well in different applications.

A well-known issue for a lot of different users is associated with write-intensive applications. There are so many write-intensive applications. Usually, the applications are designed as read-intensive ones, where the number of reads is way more than the write operations. I would say MariaDB or any other relational database is designed by default to be for read-intensive applications. There are a lot of features being added to the tool, such as something called Galera Cluster, which supports write-intensive applications and sharding. People have to come up with their own way to share their applications, and that is the only way they can come up with a better performance tool for write-intensive applications.

I have been using MariaDB for two years. I am not a customer of the product, but my company does cater to the needs of multiple customers. My company uses the tool at work, and it is a part of our product.

As a part of the NDA, I cannot discuss the number of users of the product since it is a public company, but I can say that we have thousands and thousands of customers, and every one of them has products that are on their own databases.

The technical side of the solution is there, and they have been doing this for a very long time. The solution's technical support team is responsive. I rate the technical support an eight out of ten.

Positive

I work with MariaDB and PostgreSQL.

The product's initial setup phase was not at all challenging, and the reason for that is there is so much community support. You could face any issues which are not properly discussed in the community. Almost every issue has been discussed in the community, so there is no way you could be stuck somewhere, and you are trying to figure out what you can do next since it will not happen when you use MariaDB.

The solution is deployed on a hybrid cloud model.

The community support offered by the product is good. There is one specific thing about community support, and it is that it doesn't matter if it is a relational database or any other code that is public and open source. If it is open-source, the tool gets enhanced multiple times in a better way because every company has its own requirements. As per the requirement, people are merging codes in the main branch, and I am specifically talking about GitHub for now. MariaDB has so much flexibility and features, like data compression, audit plugins, and tablespace encryption, and it supports discrete encryption. Because of the tool's community support, it has varied functions and can be used almost anywhere or wherever you want as a relational database.

In terms of data management efficiency, I would say that it is pretty efficient. The tool is simpler to support if you talk from an engineer's perspective, and it is easier to provide any assistance to the customer who needs some kind of data from their product. The tool provides its own high availability, which means a 99.99 percent high availability. The biggest thing about the tool is that it is an open-source product, and it is supported by a community, which is pretty nice, especially because the community improves the product pretty well. If the product was available at a certain price, there are very few requirements in such scenarios. For open-source products, there are multiple requirements, so the product is enhanced way faster, and that is why people prefer an open-source tool. MariaDB or MySQL are some of the most used relational databases.

It is not very complicated to maintain the tool.

I rate the tool an eight out of ten.

We use the solution for a certain database model. The application helps with recovery.

The solution is open source. The documentation is quite straightforward. It is a flexible database used in many cases, such as central bank systems, simple websites, and IoT projects.

Data continuity could be improved.

The stability is good, but we have received feedback from our review process that there are some weaknesses. For example, if MariaDB is running on our NOS Lake Red Hat and you perform an update, this can cause problems because the update may not be compatible with the OS. Therefore, it is important to keep MariaDB and the OS separate and to upgrade them separately.

The solution’s scalability is terrible. We need an office admin for the maintenance. We have around eighty to a hundred users using this solution.

The documentation is clear so there was no need to talk to technical support.

The initial setup is easy and takes less than an hour to complete. I installed MariaDB and set it up. They want it up and running, and I will give them the connection stream and everything else they need to keep the connection alive.

I recommend using the product. I have no specific advice and no complaints. If someone wants to use it, there’s no better way. Overall, I rate the solution a seven out of ten.

For various applications, we use MariaDB as a database to test the incoming and outgoing data for any application. 

We check the relational database, how it's working, how the data is organized, how the queries have been written, and how we can streamline or improve the performance of these stored procedures. 

These are the things we look for to maintain a good relationship between the front end and the back end of the system.

One of the great features of MariaDB is its scalability. It's easy to handle even with large databases. 

It's also user-friendly and allows you to create complex relationships with the data. It means you can fetch data from multiple correlated or related databases in a single query. So it allows complex relationships with specific databases.

MariaDB supports SQL, and it has an advantage over regular SQL in that it is a lighter version. Even with huge amounts of data, it performs well.

MariaDB is everything that SQL DB has, but it's much lighter and more flexible. It's also more expandable. So I don't think MariaDB has any disadvantages compared to SQL DB.

So the only issue is that it's not as lightweight as SQL DB. That's probably the only drawback.

In future releases, mainly the addition of security features would be beneficial for MariaDB. It would be great to have built-in capabilities that can be managed through plug-ins and system administration. This would require incorporating security measures into the code, which is a one-time activity but needs to be maintained. Wrappers can also be written for reusability and improved security. That's something MariaDB could benefit from.

Since I've been in my current company, we have used Microsoft SQL Server (MSSQL) as the database since the beginning. And then there's MariaDB.

Additionally, we also use Oracle in some specific projects.

Sometimes any system may have occasional issues, but overall, we are not facing significant problems. We used to face more issues in the early stages.

Overall, I would rate the stability a nine out of ten. 

MariaDB is quite easy to maintain. It's scalable and maintainable. Since it's Knox, directly or indirectly, around 40,000 people would be using it.

We have an in-house team to maintain MariaDB, so we don't require much external support.

I've worked with Oracle for one and a half years. Currently, I'm working with MariaDB and SQL DB.

I worked with Oracle DB before. Currently, I am not working with Oracle DB. Oracle is much more secure, but it is also costlier. 

With MariaDB, you have to be proactive. The security team and the design team need to be vigilant to ensure sufficient security measures. On the other hand, Oracle comes with security features included in the package, which is a major advantage. 

MariaDB is quite easy to install.

Deployment time depends on the level of application and the size of the database. For example, installing MariaDB from scratch may take some time due to design and architectural issues. 

However, if the DB is already available and you need to install it on your system, it doesn't take much time. It usually takes only one or two days, depending on the support you receive from the server side.

So, the number of people required for the deployment depends on the systems and the project. The magnitude of the database also plays a role. 

Since it's not a centralized database and specific to various systems, I would say for Knox, where we also use MariaDB in a large-scale system, there are more than 50 people involved in the design and database aspects out of a team of a thousand people.

And as for architects, there would be fewer. There are six to seven architects because there are different systems for nodes, meetings, Knox Mail, and Knox Client teams. So each specific system may have a dedicated architect.

MariaDB is relatively cheap. It is very cost-effective.

My advice would be, if you can handle the security aspect, MariaDB is a lightweight, scalable, and maintainable database that can be used for both small and large applications.

On a scale of one to ten, I would rate it nine. Due to its cost-effectiveness, scalability, and flexibility, I find it highly commendable.

We use MariaDB for any instance where we need faster retrieval and processing rates, such as establishing relationships between data entities through entity relationship mapping. MariaDB is our preference for structured data, like user details or product information. However, for handling non-structured data, such as metadata, we prefer DynamoDB or MongoDB.

MariaDB is inherently faster than MySQL database. However, given the opportunity, our team would have likely chosen Postgres for better performance in terms of concurrency, etc.

MariaDB is likely less resource-intensive than Postgres and other RDMS solutions because it offers only a subset of features.

Concurrency is a challenge in MariaDB.

I have been using MariaDB for a year.

Ten engineers are using this solution.

It's open source, but there are no dedicated technical support resources.

The deployment should be easier because we use AWS EC2 instances to run and deploy the image and the services. It took a few hours to complete.

It's an open-source solution that only charges for a server database.

I rate the solution's pricing an eight or nine out of ten, where one is expensive, and ten is cheap.

A few EC2 instances are running that solve the MySQL and the service. 

Cross-functional GUIs are currently available. For example, we use DB Workbench, a solution that provides a GUI interface for MySQL, PostgreSQL, MariaDB, and several other databases.

It is seamless unless we want more advanced features, like simple database charting or event scheduling, which MariaDB doesn't support.

Our security team and platform team maintain security features. So, it depends on the type of protocols they use.

There are no particular challenges because the development kit, such as all the SD cases that are DB connectors, is well supported by Python and Java.

Our AI projects' data comes from non-relational sources like Mongo and Dynamo. Therefore, there's no direct correlation. However, MariaDB merely serves as a repository for information, such as profile data or some form of structured text (NTT), which can be displayed in tables or otherwise.

It depends on whether they prioritize performance and features. If so, they might prefer Postgres. However, MariaDB could be the better choice if they prioritize a time-tested solution and lower costs.

MariaDB offers more features than its competitors. It supports features like sharding and concurrent connections.

Overall, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.