MySQL Reviews

We use MySQL for storing data on the web server. It is a competitor of Apache. The solution can also be used for analytics, warehousing, and Big Data.

The tool is open-source and there is no cost involved in its use.

I would like to see some improvements in the solution’s integration aspects.

I have been using MySQL for ten years.

We have optimized and stabilized the solution over a period of eight to six months.

There are around 60 plus users for the tool in our company.

There is a 25 member team involved in the tool’s maintenance and deployment.

I would rate the solution a seven out of ten. The solution’s users have the liberty of custom management. We can implement the solution in Azure, which is Microsoft’s advanced version.

We use the product for database management, as a database engine.

We use it for different projects, mainly when we have lots of data and the customer can't afford to pay the license of SQL Server, which is not a cheap one.

That's the main reason you use MySQL or Postgres or other databases. It's less expensive. 

The solution is stable.

The scalability is very good.

It's a mature solution that's been around for decades.

It is very easy to set up the product.

The support in MySQL is horrible.

It isn't as reliable as an SQL Server.

I don't see MySQL being improved at all, like in the last 10 years. It has been at the same level for a long time.

Its stability is quite good. There are no bugs or glitches. it doesn't crash or freeze. 

The solution is scalable, however, sometimes you might have issues. You need to have the knowledge to make sure that you can scale. That said, there are a lot of used MySQL implementations all around the world, which shows that it's a proven product. It has been there for more than 20 years or so.

The support is not ideal. It could be better. It runs under Oracle, and Oracle support is not the best company when it comes to supporting - especially since MySQL used to be a free, open-source solution, and remains free. Oracle doesn't have this approach in its DNA. It's an enterprise and they're not into open-source ways of working. That's why sometimes we move from MySQL to Postgres, which is similar yet has the support in the community.

I've also used Postgre and SQL Server.

This product is not as solid as SQL Server. It's not like it's a lesser quality thing, however, it's not as reliable as SQL Server. The engine is a whole different engine. SQL Server is a full-featured database engine, and MySQL is based on what we call a file-based database. It's like flat files as a database engine, so it's an underdog, if you can call it that, when it comes to database engines. That said, it works fine.

The initial setup is not that complex. It's simple and straightforward for the most part.

The solution is open-source. We don't pay for it.

There are options to get professional support from Oracle and, for that, the pricing really comes up, therefore, it's not competitive anymore. For that reason, it might be even wiser to get Oracle Database than get MySQL and pay for the premium support.

We are just end-users. However, we are happy to work with them.

With Microsoft, we are a customer, partner, and vendor. We aren't partners with Oracle. 

I would rate the solution at a six out of ten.

They just need to assign a great team to MySQL, basically, and Oracle should just leave them alone to improve the product as the product hasn't been improved in the last 10 years. Since Oracle acquired it, it has been in decline. They need to do a lot, not in terms of features. In terms of the mindset.

I would recommend Postgres which is similar to MySQL, over this product. Even the clients are coming to us with such requests. They will flat-out tell us: "we hear that MySQL is having issues and we don't want to deal with Oracle and all that kind of stuff, so let's use Postgres." It's easy to migrate over. It's almost seamless, which makes it a very attractive option.

We are using MySQL for backend operations since we are a software backend developer. We are using this tool in our backend application for acquiring the data.

We mainly use MySQL for our Relational Database Management System(RDBMS). We are maintaining our customer data in a defined way. We have to create various schema levels. We are presenting the customer data, such as name, mobile number, what was purchased, and what they like or dislike. Once we create the schema, a set of data, we need to maintain the unique constraints.

For example, for customers, we'll assign a unique ID to each record, that will be a primary key. All these SQL constraints we'll use and there should no variance or replication of data isolated. When we perform any update operations, it should not affect any of the data isolated. 

We need to take care of many things, such as consistency, isolation, and variability for constructing any database. There are a few more concepts as well, such as normalization and PL/SQL. For example, if I want to run a job at a particular time, the product will use PL/SQL. We are like implementing our coding skills to databases.

Our operations are on-premise. However, we are in the process of moving everything to the cloud.

We have many repositories in one table that we are completing for customers' data that are store product data. There are various pieces of data and data should be in the same format. For this purpose, we are using RDBMS. The data in the repository should be able to be accessed in one place which is Oracle SQL Developer. MySQL can store data for a longer duration as compared to other data solutions, such as MariaDB, which can only store data for one day. MySQL can store data for a longer period of time, and we can have primary and secondary data as well for backup purposes.

MySQL is easy to use, has fast performance, and it is comfortable for end-user to use. The schema level and structure we are using are very simple and easy to understand. Additionally, packaging tool development is straightforward and the data is presented in a way that is very simple to understand.

MySQL can improve some of its functions. However, it is dependent on the use case. For example, if we are having multiple database connections in this tool, and we are performing one operation in one database, it takes a lot of time due to the reason we are selecting and processing the data. When we have a lot of data it takes a longer time. The transaction gets stuck in a queue and if we try to stop that particular transaction, it won't abort until all the selected records have been processed. This sometimes can be a lot of time and it can hold up our live processing of transactions. This product should be able to handle multiple processing at a time.

In an upcoming release, there should be something added similar to EPL. For example, when using the flow diagram, we can create a schema. We have two useful features to add or create the table, but there should be some UI features to allow us to drag and drop to create other schemas. This would be very helpful.

I have been using MySQL for approximately four years.

I have found the development tools to be highly stable in MySQL.

The scalability of MySQL is very good. There are no barriers to it. It can be used and accommodated in any particular language. We can use it with Java and Python.

We have almost everyone in my organization using the solution. We have developers and support teams all using it. If my organization has 1,000 people, almost 900 people out of them were using the service.

I have evaluated MariaDB.

We use a solution called Jenkins to help us with all the pipelines. The pipelines are all created and configured in the Jenkins. We are in a distributed server architecture and the full process can take approximately 20 minutes for one server.

If we have a large amount of data we have to take care of it. If this particular data is not used over the years, we have to make maintenance decisions on it after we use it. The developer administrator and the team will be responsible.

We are using the licensed version of MySQL.

I would advise others that this is a useful tool.

I rate MySQL an eight out of ten.

I started to use MySQL at some point when I had some issues that I couldn't get around. I normally use the tool in professional opportunities and when I require support from MySQL.

Cacti is a tool for monitoring devices on a network in graphical terms, for which it uses MySQL or MariaDB. I mostly deploy Cacti with MySQL or MariaDB. Somewhere down the line, I started to have some issues with the permissions in MySQL, including its areas like superuser privileges and similar stuff, which took me a while to figure out. I think the tool is fine for me now.

The most valuable feature of the solution stems from the fact that it helps me to get my work done. I am more interested in getting my work done than any feature it comes with since, as long as it gets my work done, it can actually help me achieve my objectives.

Nowadays, I use phpMyAdmin or MySQL WorkBench to manage MySQL. I would have been in a position to comment on what requires improvement if I had spoken about the tool three years ago. There are no improvements needed in the UI of the solution since many tools in the market help the user get the job done. MySQL WorkBench belongs to Oracle.

The performance, stability, and security are areas with shortcomings in MySQL, where improvements are required.

It would be a great improvement if the product could be made affordable enough for me to be able to access support from MYSQL, especially when I deal with mission-critical applications.

I have been using MySQL since 2014.

It is a very stable solution. I deployed the product six years ago, and it still works fine.

I won't be able to comment on the product's scalability since I haven't deployed it in a cluster environment.

Our company has over a thousand devices, including switches and a couple of other devices, which report to MySQL for management purposes. In general, MySQL is a very robust tool.

Somewhere down the line, I got introduced to MariaDB as well. Nowadays, I use MariaDB rather than MySQL most of the time.

The product's initial setup phase is easy since I use package management software. I mostly take care of the deployment phase with the help of Docker and other tools. If you decide to use the default deployment settings provided by MySQL, then it is a straightforward process to deploy it.

A lot of things have changed since I have deployed the solution. The solution is like a new product nowadays since you just need an application to deploy it presently. The other area where you need to take care of the solution is knowing how to secure it very well so that it becomes less vulnerable and prevents people from taking advantage of the solution.

Mostly, I go to the MySQL website to download the binaries, and I just deploy them on a Windows machine or another system, which is just a straightforward process. The product's installation phase is not much of a problem.

The solution is deployed on an on-premises model.

Earlier in my company, there were three people who used to take care of the deployment of the solution, but presently, I don't know who handles the deployment part.

In the past, the product was free for users, which ensured that users could experience a high return on investment from the use of the solution. I don't know the licensing models attached to the solution currently, but the return on investment is very high if you use it for a very limited amount of time.

MySQL was one of the tools I was introduced to from the very beginning when I was in school. Though I knew about Microsoft SQL Server, the lectures in my school did not introduce me to it since more focus was placed on MySQL. I find MySQL easier to use compared to Microsoft SQL Server.

I recommend the solution to those who plan to use it since it is a very good product that comes to my mind since it is always available. I don't know about the current licensing model of the product because it was an open-source tool earlier. I don't remember myself attempting to check what kind of license MySQL uses presently. In the past, Microsoft SQL Server used to cost a lot of money, which my company couldn't afford at that time.

I rate the overall system an eight out of ten.

We use MySQL to manage business intelligence reports by linking them with Oracle database and Power BI. 

I like MySQL's feature that helps to automate things. 

The solution is expensive. 

I have been using the product for five years. 

I would rate MySQL's stability a ten out of ten. 

My company has two users for the solution. 

We have not contacted support until now. We have an onboarding manual. 

The tool's installation is not complex but you need to have experience to set it up. You need to download the solution and pay for it. The installation can be done within an hour. 

You need to pay upgrade costs every year. 

I would rate MySQL a nine out of ten. 

We have used the solution to manage database administration and custom attributes.

The solution has all the essential features. We can manipulate bulk data, clean up data, divide it into compartments, and optimize it.

There should be a training platform for the solution without the complexities of owning a server partition in our system.

I rate the solution's stability a ten.

It is a scalable solution. We have 1200 solution users in our organization.

The solution's initial setup was straightforward.

I rate the solution as a ten. I advise others to have durable resources to handle the operations of MySQL systems.

The most valuable feature of MySQL is auto-scaling.

The GUI could improve to make MySQL better.

I have been using MySQL for approximately four years.

The stability of MySQL is good.

MySQL can scale well.

I have used the support and level three support is great.

The initial setup of MySQL was straightforward.

We have not seen a return on investment.

The price of the solution is good because we have a good partner.

The solution is good at scaling.

I rate MySQL a ten out of ten.

We primarily use the solution for NDB and CG clusters.

The solution has made it easier for us to support our clients in India for a government technology project relating to CG clusters.

The IO segregation in CGE is valuable.

The auto-tuning and NDB cluster has some limitations regarding foreign keys. For example, when creating a partition with shared architecture data, the foreign keys do not work properly. Additionally, whenever we are working with this solution, as our projects are carried out globally, the size of the database is getting used fast. In case of replication and data access with two multiple sites or nodes to become a cluster, you need two separate data storage for accessing the same data from the two nodes. Hence, this consumes a lot of storage space.

We have been using the solution for five years and we are currently using version 8.0.31.

The solution is stable.

The solution is scalable, but I can configure this product with two nodes in case of a rack, but it is impossible in any of the databases. Therefore, I rate it a seven out of ten.

We do not have experience with customer service and support.

The initial setup is straightforward and it took less than twenty minutes. I rate it a nine out of ten.

One person is required for deployment.

I rate the solution an eight out of ten. The solution is good but auto-tuning and the NDB cluster can be improved.