MySQL Reviews

MySQL was open-source at the beginning until Oracle acquired it in 2010. I started working with MySQL because I was an Oracle expert, having worked for Oracle for eight years. That's why I added MySQL to my skills as an administrator. MySQL is a powerful database engine that is easy to install, manage, and work with. It's ideal for fast application deployment and is cost-effective as well.

MySQL is for metadata and data. My organization has used it to store data about hardware servers and their configurations, including network and storage configurations. MySQL is an RDBMS engine, so it can be used for any business application.

MySQL has a straightforward installation process, is lightweight, and easy to manage. Compared to its competitors, it is more accessible and user-friendly. While competitors like Oracle are known for their extensive features, they are often more complex to install, configure, and maintain, requiring experts to manage them, which can be costly. MySQL, now owned by Oracle, may not have the same feature set as Oracle's flagship database, but it is simple to install, manage, and cost-effective. MySQL is a viable option that can be enhanced with additional features, making it reliable for small to medium-scale applications and capable of effectively handling substantial amounts of data.

MySQL is now in a real application cluster. In terms of high availability, MySQL can be configured for active-active or as a real application cluster.

I have been using MySQL for ten years.

When MySQL is involved in the metadata, it never gets down. It's very stable.

It's secure. MySQL supports large databases that can contain nearly fifty million records. It also supports up to sixty-four indexes per table.

They provide 24/7 support. It provides faster resolution and identification.

It is very easy to install and takes an hour to complete.

I rate the initial setup a ten out of ten, where one is difficult and ten is easy.

It is open-source and supported by Oracle.

Oracle occupies it, so Oracle added more security features, such as password system improvements, host-based verification, and encryption, to the MySQL engine. It's developed and managed by a big company, and they keep adding new features.

I recommend another solution for large data, like billions of records. However, MySQL is a good option for data up to about fifty million records.

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

I don't use MySQL extensively, but I use the code within MySQL for preparing some reports and all that.

Code is easy to write and code, it's easy to understand. That's why it's widely used. The queries are very easy to understand and [write the] code. For coding, it's very easy.

The user interface could be more user friendly. Mainly because most of the times we see black and white digital lines. Something like Python. 

I have been using it for three years. I have been using it since 2021. 

I haven't experienced any bad things.

It is widely adopted in our company. We have around 60% of our total employees using it. 

We have an internal support team. We usually connect to them, and they will resolve the issue. We don't need to connect to the MySQL team directly.

The initial setup is not very difficult. It's easy only.

The pricing is not much expensive, it's cheap only.

I would recommend it. For beginners, it is pretty much easier compared to other tools. The queries are very similar and easy to learn in a short span of time.

For beginners, it is very easy to use. It would be something easy to learn. It is a perfect tool for beginners. 

Overall, I would rate the solution a seven out of ten. 

We use MySQL in multiple projects for storing, task management apps, and dating apps.

MySQL is the best option for the Laravel PHP framework. It supports multiple model systems, and it's very easy to call MySQL compared to other languages like MongoDB. I prefer MySQL for the Laravel PHP framework.

The solution's security features depend on where we host our server and database. We have some preventive measures to reduce attacks. We have taken authentication and only allow a particular IP address.

In MySQL, we need to define every table beforehand.

I have been using MySQL for four to five years.

In MySQL, we need to define every table beforehand. However, we don't need to do so in MongoDB. We can add a new row or column in MongoDB anytime, making it much easier. If you purchase MongoDB's plan, it supports many security features, and you don't need to check about security. They will handle everything.

The solution’s initial setup is very easy. For the first time, the solution's implementation will take some time. However, you can use it multiple times after you configure it.

MySQL is a cheap solution.

Maintaining the database is a task. We take a weekly backup for each database so that we can upload it to the server if anything happens to the data. We created a cron job so that the data can be taken and then uploaded to a specific space so that we can go back to the particular big data whenever we want. I prefer MongoDB for scalability because it's much easier to maintain MongoDB.

Just one person is enough to maintain the solution. The solution has good documentation available on Google.

Overall, I rate the solution six and a half out of ten.

I use the solution for personal use cases like software development, mostly database bug systems.

I used the tool to build our website. It is used as a database to store information.

SKIP LOCKED is a valuable feature. It prevents us from deleting things we put in the database. It's mostly for background jobs in the software development site in MySQL 8. It is a new feature. The solution easily integrates with other tools and systems in our IT environment.

The full-text search feature must be improved.

I have been using the solution for the past three weeks.

I rate the tool’s stability an eight out of ten. We can create a database user schema. It's quite easy to update and remove in case anything happens. Backing up is quite easy. We have security features for the backup.

I’m the only user in my organization.

The product provides good documentation online.

It is easy to deploy the product. I deployed it on my own. The deployment took an hour. We deploy the product using Kamal. It uses Docker. The tool is deployed on the cloud. To deploy the solution, we just have to enter the password in the server and deploy it. It wasn't much of a hassle.

The tool is easy to manage and saves us time. It has much less complications.

We're using the community version. The tool is open source.

I also use PostgreSQL.

The tool helps us get the job done. It is not very complex. Overall, I rate the product a nine out of ten.

Mostly, we're using it as a database behind a machine learning application.

For starters, it's free, which is always nice, and it's also pretty straightforward to use. It's a nice conventional database. We don't need the sort of flexibility that you get with most SQL databases and stuff like that, so we are happy with a good old-fashioned relational database. It's totally good for that.

It works. It's reliable. We haven't done any configuration management for probably about two years, but as far as I remember, that was pretty straightforward as well. It's doing what it needs to do as far as we're concerned.

The workbench could be improved. In particular, error messages can be improved, which are horrific and completely unhelpful. I'd like to see improved parsing of errors. When you write SQL and it crashes, it usually is something completely irrelevant and not helpful. I've started to use GPT 3.5 for finding out how to do things. I got to do something a bit different, and that I found to be very useful. If there was some way to tie it into one of the new AI tools, that would probably be a good idea. There were a couple of things that I've found difficult to do in the past, and I remember they were fiddly. I set them into ChatGPT, which is GPT 3.5, and it gave first-class answers.

I find it clunky. It just doesn't feel very modern. It feels as if you have to go through multiple steps to get to places, and it's not clear, but operationally, I find it fine.

I've been using this solution for about five years.

It's reliable. I never lost any data, which you anyways shouldn't. I'd rate it a ten out of ten in terms of stability because we never had the slightest problem. We are not in a challenging environment, but I haven't had any problems.

We've had absolutely no limitations. However, we haven't got enormous data. It's not very vast, so scalability hasn't been an issue. At our level, it's not even a question. It's absolutely perfect. I'd rate it an eight out of ten in terms of scalability, which I describe as very good

I've never contacted them, but technical support within the environment itself isn't good. I'd rate it a three out of ten, but now if I can use my own technical support with GPT 3.5, it comes up to about an eight out of ten. It's a kind of hybrid support.

We weren't using a similar solution previously. We would prototype from things like Excel or straight-off .TXT files. I had some experience and so did my business partner, and we just decided this looked like the right answer.

That was pretty straightforward as I remember. It was a while ago now, but I don't remember any difficulties at all. I'd rate it a nine out of ten in terms of the ease of setup. 

It's free.

We did look at MongoDB, but it wasn't what we needed, so we decided we go with something a little more conventionally established, and MySQL absolutely fitted the bill. We didn't need anything else. We got some colleagues who used Oracle, but it's expensive and quite difficult to use. 

If you don't have any unusual requirements or absolutely vast databases, it's ideal. We certainly have no problems at all. It just works.

Overall, I'd rate it a nine out of ten. Nothing is perfect, but it's as good as we could have asked for.

We use it to meet the requirements of our customers while optimizing performance and reliability within the constraints provided.

The performance and scalability of our project have been influenced positively by MySQL. From what I've observed, performance has been satisfactory, and I haven't received any complaints from teams that have implemented it.

While MySQL offers strong basic functionality.

MySQL lacks a feature akin to Oracle's Real Application Clusters, which ensures continuous database availability within the same data center or nearby data centers. Without this capability, MySQL's suitability for mission-critical applications is diminished. Until MySQL incorporates a similar feature at the application level, its appeal for high availability remains limited. Historically, we've relied on external security measures for data protection, such as encryption. However, when encryption methodologies are employed within MySQL, there may be a slight performance degradation due to the computational overhead associated with processing large volumes of data in the database.

I have been working with it for twelve years.

Stability is crucial, and it's influenced not just by the inherent features of the database system, but also by how the application team writes queries. If queries are poorly written or not optimized, it can affect stability significantly. While logging can help, improper usage, such as logging entire tables instead of specific fields, can also impact stability. Therefore, ensuring stability requires a holistic approach that considers both the database infrastructure and how the application interacts with it.

Scalability is not as straightforward with MySQL compared to Oracle. I would rate it seven out of ten. Our clientele typically includes small, medium, and enterprise-level businesses.

The initial setup was straightforward. I would rate it nine out of ten.

For the MySQL installation, it's crucial to have a broader understanding of the solution we're implementing. Sometimes, we may need to address OS-level issues, especially when dealing with OS-level addressing like OSFlow. In such cases, thorough testing at the voice level is essential to ensure a smooth installation process. Implementing MySQL in a single-node setup may uncover additional challenges that need to be addressed.

Typically, our focus is on implementing the product rather than the database or operating system level. While I oversee infrastructure aspects, the implementation process is heavily influenced by the specific application being deployed. From setting up voice-level deployment and alerting to handling licensing and the database infrastructure, this entire process usually takes four to six weeks, depending on the complexity of the functionality. Once we complete the initial deployment, subsequent enrollments become more streamlined, and the application is handed over for production use. Any further adjustments or configurations are managed separately.

The pricing falls within the moderate range. I would rate it four out of ten.

Rather than recommending specific servers or operating systems, decisions are driven by how the application behaves and what functionalities it requires. This approach streamlines the process as pre-tested systems are already available, reducing the time and investment required for testing. Overall, I would rate it eight out of ten.

I would use MySQL for a medium project, with around 1,00,000 hundred thousand users, because of the indexing and stored procedures.

MySQL's performance needs to be improved for enterprise-level applications compared to Oracle and Postgres. That's the only drawback I found in MySQL. When the table storage is full, the solution's performance becomes slow. The solution's security needs improvement as DB2 is more secure than MySQL.

I have been using MySQL for more than ten years.

MySQL has good stability.

I rate the solution a six or seven out of ten for stability.

Around 150 users are using the solution daily in our organization.

I rate the solution a six out of ten for scalability.

We previously used Oracle. We switched to MySQL because Oracle's license was costly.

It's really easy to set up MySQL. On a scale from one to ten, where one is difficult and ten is easy, I rate the solution's initial setup an eight out of ten.

We implemented the solution in our organization through a consultant. It took a few hours to set up everything. Around one to two people were needed to deploy the solution.

MySQL is a cheap solution.

When you compare Oracle and DB2 with SQL Server and MySQL, all these come under RDBMS (Relational Database Management System). Since the licensing for Oracle and DB2 is costly, people will go for either MySQL or Postgres. People go for MySQL because it is better than Postgres in indexing and supports multiple data types compared to Postgres.

Just one person is needed to maintain MySQL. We didn't face any challenges using MySQL because of many open communities. If you have MySQL's commercial license, you will get good support. I would recommend MySQL to users who are going for medium enterprise applications.

Overall, I rate the solution a seven out of ten.

MySQL is an open-source relational database management system used to store data.

MySQL is an easy-to-use solution that provides stability, reliability, flexibility, performance, security, and high availability.

MySQL could introduce more indexing strategies. There are a couple of strategies where you can index things to be more searchable and visible. We lack that kind of functionality. For example, if your name is indexed correctly with a certain strategy, it can improve the search results faster. The solution’s interface could be improved.

I have been using MySQL for my entire career.

MySQL is a stable solution.

MySQL is a scalable solution.

The solution’s initial setup is easy.

MySQL is a free and open-source solution.

MySQL is deployed on the cloud in our organization. Big companies like Netflix, Uber, and Facebook use the solution. Since MySQL is an old product, many people might have faced similar issues, posted them online, and got a resolution. MySQL's performance and scalability features have supported our database growth.

New users can follow the documentation to use the solution, as it is straightforward. You need to be very clear about why you want to use the solution. MySQL is a relational database management system that cannot be used as a dynamic database management system.

MySQL is generally faster and more efficient than other relational database management systems. Hence, it is our preferred choice for applications that require high performance.

Overall, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.