MySQL Reviews

The primary use case is as a reporting solution, data collection, data manipulation, and similar tasks. We install MySQL on Linux and Windows machines for testing our enterprise application.

We are a solution provider and this product is part of our offering to our clients.

MySQL hasn't really affected our organization, specifically because we primarily use it in a consulting model.

All of the databases basically have the same set of features.

What I've been most pleased with is the cost point, performance, and ease of use.

It is very easy to configure, it's easy to deploy, and it's cross-platform capabilities are quite nice.

The analytics features are in need of improvement. They aren't as far along as the capabilities that you have in terms of analytics for SQL Server and Oracle.

I have been using MySQL for about five years.

I've had no problems with stability and its recovery processing, error processing, and things along those lines have been fine.  We always use Java applications and the JDBC drivers work fine.

I haven't had any issues at all with its reporting or its transaction processing, or anything else. 

For our use-cases, the scalability is fine. We haven't seen any issues and we're processing probably hundreds of millions of rows each day. We're not into the billions or tens of billions, so we're probably a medium-to-low use case.

Most of our instances are single-instance databases, so I haven't had to deal with its clustering capabilities or distributed database feature set.

Our clients vary in size, although we generally operate as a small system inside a major organization.

I have never had to utilize technical support. There was never an issue that I had to call in.

I use a lot of databases including MySQL, Microsoft SQL Server, Oracle, and PostgreSQL. 

The performance of SQL Server and Oracle is better than MySQL. The two alternatives have other features, as well.

The initial set up very straightforward. MySQL is easy to deploy and very easy to configure. We can literally bring up instances in minutes.

This product has a good price point.

We had been on SQL Server and Oracle, and a subset of our customers wanted us to switch and use MySQL. We explored what that transition would take and then implemented it.

My advice for anybody who is looking into implementing MySQL is to start by carefully evaluating their use cases. One of the things that we found is that MySQL didn't necessarily have all of the flexibility for JSON and XML processing at the time. I know that they've improved it, although it's not quite the same as what you see specifically in Oracle. So, the customer has to evaluate that. For straight-on basic transaction processing, it's worked out just as well with few issues from SQL Server to MySQL or from Oracle to MySQL.

For my use, I'm fine with what they have. I'll be interested in what they'll provide in analytics, as well as JSON and XML processing if that's even on their roadmap. For right now, it's really not an impact on my use case.

If I were rating SQL Server or Oracle then I would rate either one a nine out of ten. The only difference is that they do perform better than MySQL, although they don't perform so much better than it's relevant.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

I like MySQL because of its community.

MySQL doesn't have the auto-clustering and database clustering features that other competitors provide. They can include these features.

I have been using MySQL for about two years. 

It is stable.

It is really easy to scale. We have around 20 to 40 users who use it regularly.

I never interacted with their technical support. If there is any problem in my project, I just look for it on Stack Overflow and fix it easily. It also comes with good documentation.

It is easy to install. The deployment duration depends upon your internet connection. If you have a good internet connection, the deployment would be faster.

I would recommend this product if someone is new to the IT world.

I would rate MySQL an eight out of ten.

I am a senior manager of the infrastructure team and MySQL is one of the products that I work with. We use it in an e-commerce portal. The database is light and everything works smoothly.

The performance is great.

This is a lightweight product that is not demanding on the resources, which is what I think gives it the edge.

We faced some details in clustering, although this may have been because we did not have enough knowledge about MySQL clustering. In general, an easier implementation for clustering would be an improvement.

The product is a little bit complex and it is difficult to find sufficient documentation.

We have been using MySQL for approximately six months.

We have not had any problems with stability.

MySQL is easy to scale.

We have dealt with Oracle support regarding other products such as Oracle Database and Oracle WebLogic. I believe that it will be of the same standard, although I'm not sure.

I am not a technical person but my understanding is that they are competent.

My complaint about them is that when we have a problem, we have to explain the same thing many different times to different engineers. Every time we engage with a new engineer, we have to start all over again. This is a nightmare that we chased three months ago.

In addition to MySQL, we use Oracle and Microsoft SQL Server.

Oracle is an enterprise-level product but it is very straightforward to install and it has sufficient documentation and guides, which we did not easily find for MySQL.

Implementing clustering depends on a few different layers or different components. The clustering layer handles requests from the applications, and it is all a bit more complex than Microsoft SQL Server or Oracle.

The design, review, and deployment took approximately one week.

At the moment, because of the issue that we are having with the clustering, I may not recommend MySQL. It would first need to have the clustering problem fixed and then have a sufficient deployment guide. 

I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.

MySQL gives us all of the critical features that we need in a database, but without the costs.

The most valuable feature is that we can implement clustered solutions.

I would like to have features that allow us to jump between the cloud and our on-premises system.

I have been using MySQL for about 20 years.

MySQL is a very stable product.

I know that it is scalable, and in fact, that is why we chose it. We always have it in mind that in some number of years, you have to scale the solution to something different in terms of architecture.

As it is now, our databases are not big. They are critical, but not large in size. We are not dealing with Big Data.

We have never contacted Oracle for MySQL support.

The documentation that is available is enough for my needs.

This was the first database solution that we used. I have used other database products such as Oracle, for example. Oracle comes at a heavy cost.

This is an open-source product that can be used free of charge.

This is the product that was proposed to us and we implemented it.

MySQL is a product that I can strongly recommend. However, it is important for you to have the in-house knowledge to support it. Some level of in-house expertise is necessary, otherwise, you will have to rely only on external opinions. In my opinion, that's not good. Sometimes they have good intentions but don't understand the reality.

I cannot give MySQL a perfect rating because we don't use all of the features. That said, I can tell you that I am totally satisfied with it. It's a very stable product and it's something that is not difficult to deal with.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

I use MySQL to teach students about databases. They implement projects using this product.

MySQL is lacking some of the features that you find in a commercial product, but it is sufficient for basic functions.

This product is a good teaching tool for students who want to learn about networked databases.

The documentation is pretty weak and should be improved.

The GUI for PHP MySQL Admin can be improved because it is not very flexible and sometimes difficult to use.

I have been using MySQL for more than five years.

I have experience with other full-scale databases, such as PostgreSQL. For use cases where I need full functionality, I would use another product.

I am using the Community Edition, which is available free of charge.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

The main reason that customers pick MySQL is that it's cost-efficient.

Apart from the features that are in the enterprise part, we find the database to be
valuable. The connectors and the backup features are valuable as well. We use the
basic database. We don't really use the extra features. Our clients like the security
features in the database.

We would like to see more security.

I have been using MySQL for three years. 

My customers haven't mentioned having any problems with stability. 

Scalability is good enough.

I haven't contacted Oracle in regards to MySQL but I have contacted Oracle support for other things. They're okay but from my end, the problem is that they're not proactive. From one to five, I would rate them a four. 

There's a lot of documentation on the Oracle support portal even though you must be contracted customer. There is also a lot of support information on the community portals and google search in general. This is the reason we picked MySQL from the rest.

The initial setup isn't so complex. You have to get a lot of support from the
community. From my end, it's not so complex. You should consult with the
community.

My experience has been open-source. Oracle should start putting in some of the enterprise features in the standard version. There are some key features that should be part of the standard. Things like replication should be part of the standard version as opposed to it being in the enterprise version.

I'm not involved from the database side as much. I primarily use it for reviewing the data structure as the architecture before I build a data model in our BI tools.

General querying is pretty much what I do, and also analyzing data types and data structures within the database itself. I review the data structure within them. And I use that to build the data model, which we have in our reporting environment. That's primarily all I use it for.

What it would compare it to, from my point of view would be, Microsoft SQL Studio. I find the Microsoft solution a bit better. But mostly in terms of the UI layout, I would say. I just find it a little bit more efficient. But to be honest, I can work equally as well with both.

I've been working with MySQL for two and a half years. 

We haven't experienced any issues with scalability.

I haven't directly contacted their technical support. 

I haven't gotten feedback from the IT team.

The initial setup was pretty straightforward. I would have worked with our IT team in terms of the initial setup. In terms of connecting to the database and to the data sources, it is pretty straightforward.

I would rate MySQL a seven out of ten. 

To make it a perfect ten, they should improve the UI. It's got quite a narrow range, and there's a lot more obvious to the database side than what I deal with. The UI is not quite as sharp I would say as the Microsoft solution. In some cases, I find that there are better shortcuts available in Microsoft solutions.

If I was choosing, I would probably lean towards Microsoft. That may be just a purely personal preference. My use of MySQL has primarily been from a data integration point of view, a data architecture point of view, and reviewing the database itself, and the data structure, data types. In my role, I don't define data and I don't build the database, I'm purely on the interrogation and the analytics side. I probably would find the Microsoft solution slightly better. But MySQL does absolutely provide what I require from that point of view. So I would recommend it, yes.

We are an IT services provider, so the solution is for our customers. I can't answer for the customers in terms of how they use it. 

Typically, customers are running applications that need to connect MySQL and to store some of the data.

The solution is free to use, which is its most valuable aspect.

The interface is quite good.

The stability and scalability are very good.

Overall, it's an excellent solution. We don't have to implement anything else.

We haven't noticed and features that are lacking.

From a user perspective, the initial setup could be simplified a bit.

I've been using the solution since 2000. It's been about 20 years now since I first was introduced to MySQL.

The stability is good. Neither we or our clients have had to deal with bugs, glitches or crashes. Everyone's been satisfied with it. Stability is one of its best features.

The scalability of the solution is good. We haven't had trouble scaling at all.

We're using the community version of the solution. I don't have any complaint with the level of support, however, it is online and there isn't a support line.

The initial setup isn't always straightforward. Sometimes it is complex. For example, if you are doing a database expansion. For database expansion, you have to configure it and you have to know SQL quite well. You have to juggle a few things, which makes it complicated. However, from an IT perspective, it's a good tool, so it's worth the effort.

The solution doesn't cost anything to use. It's absolutely free.

We are IT services provider, and provide this solution to our customers. It's typically installed on a dedicated server.

When we are working with it, we are doing SQL queries, and on top of that, we are using MySQL to do some reporting as well. It does what we want it to do and our clients are also happy with the results they get. It's a fine solution.

I'd advise those considering working with the solution to be patient.

We don't have any partnership MySQL. We are mostly a Microsoft partner. We mainly use the solution because of the community and the SQL server that's different from Oracle's server. From time to time we have to use MySQL.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten. From our perspective, it's free to use, it's stable and it's fast and scalable. It makes it a good option for many organizations.