MariaDB Reviews

We use MariaDB for industrial automation. We log some tags, and we keep the tags in the database or historical storage.

It is very simple to install, and the commands are exactly the same as MySQL.

The learning curve is small and standardized, and not anything complicated. Other than that, it isn’t much different than other solutions. It's very similar to MySQL, but a little bit more light-weighted compared to it. Unless you do a very heavy login of data, it will be fine. It is based on AWS, and MariaDB is good for certain things. 

It should work across all fields like SQLite, as it is the basis of any application, even apps for phones and the like.

Usually, we are capable of handling our programs. We rarely use customer support. One time I got in touch with Oracle's customer service, but it was just one time. In general, we can handle the issues by ourselves. We are not really lower-level users and are all skilled with the programs. 

I have used PostgreSQL and Oracle. PostgreSQL and MariaDB are quite similar and we still use it.

The initial setup is very simple. The deployment was done within a few minutes.

I always use the free version.

I would rate MariaDB almost an eight out of ten.

I think it's a pretty useful database. It's very simple to install and that's one of the very positive things about it because sometimes if you go into tools like Oracle, it is more difficult. It is not just the downloading of the installer on any computer from Linux or Mac or Windows. MariaDB works in a blink of an eye, and the database runs right away.

Maria DB is a good product. If any clients want to use MariaDB, I agree with them. The decision to use any software is mostly made by the decision-maker or management. 

As you know, we have better job interactions, and in an enterprise, whether to use MariaDB or another option like MySQL, it's a political decision. I am an architect in the permission system, which follows the policies of this enterprise.

It doesn't have the same level of maturity metrics as Postgres.

For example, if you look at the architecture of Postgres, it has an architecture similar to Oracle, a robust and widely practiced architecture. In terms of multi-database support, both Postgres and MySQL have the same objective. 

Every software, including MariaDB, has its own advantages and features tailored to customer needs. In my opinion, it's a very good solution. I don't have any points to criticize it as a database. We prioritize the needs of our customers and choose from various options accordingly. For instance, MariaDB or MySQL could be suitable options depending on the specific requirements of the project.

In the future release, better management of tablespaces would be beneficial. Currently, it's a bit lacking in that area. Additionally, more efficient space utilization could be improved.

I have only tested it for internet access tools and all the cases for MariaDB, without the enterprise edition.

I am referring to the market ID, Comenity Edition. It is a branch of MySQL and has similar features.

It is a stable solution. 

It is a scalable solution. You know, in my project, I haven't come across any product that was highly scalable.

I have used it for a few months, but I didn't extensively test the scalability of the database. In France, it's not commonly used as a scalable database. In any case, it is one of the databases available, and it can be used with high availability solutions.

The initial setup is very easy. 

It is free of charge. I didn't use the paid version. 

Maria DB offers various advantages over its competitors. It offers the ability to simultaneously use active server capabilities. This feature is very attractive for this type of solution.

If someone asked me about MariaDB, I would say that it is easy to implement and stable. However, it lacks a significant number of experts in the market compared to Postgres. Integration can also be a challenge.

I would rate Maria DB a seven out of ten. 

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.

We use MariaDB for small and middle-sized applications of all kinds. It is primarily used for database operations and functions as a database server.

We use some asynchronous master-slave implementations and synchronous multi-master Galera setups.

The only potential area for improvement could be the pricing model, which might benefit from being more flexible or a bit cheaper.

I have been working with MariaDB for five years.

MariaDB is very stable. I would rate its stability a nine out of ten.

MariaDB is fine for small and middle-sized databases. However, for very large environments, I would hesitate as I don't think that MariaDB is limitless scalable. There is a decisive difference between MariaDB and larger databases like Oracle.

The initial setup of MariaDB is simple enough.

My colleagues or I usually do the setup. We install and configure everything, and once it's running, the client takes over with the application setup.

I have found the price of commercial MariaDB to be pretty steep, although not as high as Oracle. Customers often prefer the Community Edition because it's free.

MariaDB's main competitors are MySQL, Oracle, and Postgres. I think Postgres is the sharpest competitor to MariaDB.

I would fully recommend MariaDB. It is stable, performs well, and is relatively easy to handle. Overall, it has good basic functionality.

I'd rate the solution eight out of 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.

In my work with ServiceNow, customer instances typically use MariaDB databases. As a performance engineer and tester, I focus on the application's performance and ensure its smooth integration with MariaDB. This means I'm responsible for identifying and troubleshooting any performance issues that might arise.

A relational database like MariaDB offers several advantages, including faster query execution and improved login security. Having evaluated other options like MySQL, I find MariaDB's strengths align perfectly with my specific database needs. 

MariaDB is known for its user-friendly interface and excels in specific performance areas. It delivers fast processing times, particularly for frequent select queries and insert/update operations.

While MariaDB is a good relational database, it can be inflexible for complex use cases. It doesn't adapt well to changing needs and lacks features like time series data support, which requires us to use ServiceNow's Clotho DB. In short, MariaDB's strength lies in its core functionality but it is not suitable for all situations.

While MariaDB itself doesn't offer built-in analytics tools, ServiceNow provides Stats Now for internal data visualization. This tool integrates with other analytics platforms like Splunk or Grafana, all pulling data from the same central source. MariaDB likely avoids including its own analytics due to these existing solutions within ServiceNow.

I have been using MariaDB for two years.

I would rate the stability of MariaDB eight out of ten. Certain queries can be slow but overall MariaDB is stable.

As a relational database, MariaDB inherits the advantages and disadvantages of this category, but it also offers easy scalability. We can add more nodes to the database cluster as needed to handle growing data and user demands. Additionally, MariaDB allows for the creation of backups to ensure data security and simplifies the scaling process itself.

MariaDB's initial deployment was smooth thanks to our extensive automation within ServiceNow. While data fetching hasn't been thoroughly tested yet, overall the process has been positive.

The deployment can take anywhere from one to seven days because MariaDB takes time to clone.

Between MariaDB and Oracle, I find Oracle is better because it provides a lot more information and is more comfortable to work with.

I would rate MariaDB eight out of ten.

MariaDB excels for well-defined tasks involving specific data sets. However, it might not be ideal for highly dynamic situations requiring frequent exploration and manipulation of large, diverse data volumes. 

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.

We develop financial software such as credit management solutions for banks, financial institutions, and telcos, basically anyone who deals with credit. We are users of this product and resell to our customers. I'm the operations manager. 

The solution is valuable because it has PL/SQL compatibility. Our base was previously on Oracle and we wanted to change our solution to a DBS which meant finding something compatible with that language. It's really a great language, especially as it's one that you can get for free. If we build our technical knowledge, then we won't need third-party support which is a strong plus.

The PL/SQL performance is slow. If you have big batch jobs running in the middle of the night for a bank doing its end-of-day audits, then MariaDB will take three times longer than using Oracle. The product lacks sufficient detail in its reports. MariaDB has many extra features that would help to optimize the DB in the enterprise version and it would be helpful if it were possible to add some of those features in the open source version. 

I've been using this solution for two years. 

The solution is very stable in the right perameters. If I have a customer looking for something that's not batch job heavy, then we use MariaDB. If I have a core system that's going to take a ton of records and go through all these in the batch jobs at night, then we default to Oracle, because it's faster. We've proposed it to enterprise clients and we've proven to them that it's stable enough.

It's probably one of the most used RDBMS's for scalability. We haven't really tested it on millions and millions of customers but there's no problem with scalability. 

We use the community for support. If we were to purchase support, the cost would be around 5k per year. It's a big difference. We usually just use the after-market support and haven't required any direct support from the company. We've been able to handle it internally. 

When I compare MariaDB to Oracle, an industry leader, the big difference we found is performance in the PL/SQL mode. With Oracle, regular queries get executed at the same level with no issues. For ease of use and the setup, they're pretty similar. We also looked at IBM DB2 but there were compatibility issues and it was significantly slower. 

The initial setup is really easy for our team. It's a quick download and configuration. We have set parameters.

We use the open source edition which doesn't require licensing. We don't offer the enterprise edition, because if we're taking the customer off Oracle, for the additional benefits, we have to optimize the cost. If we have a customer with budget constraints, it's saving hundreds of thousands of dollars, sometimes millions, if we use MariaDB instead of Oracle.

I rate this solution nine out of 10.