MySQL Reviews

I'm using it to create a small database for a project that I'm working on.

The easy access to the data and the ability to sort the data with multiple methods are very valuable features.

It's quite easy to grasp and is really well documented, which are huge plus points.

Sometimes, I get lost in the toggles and buttons, and a better visual design would be nice. The layout is not user-friendly or efficient.

I would like to be able to sort the data easily without having to do a request to get the table out of the database into the web page. At present, I can't do it directly inside MySQL; I have to do a request and print out my request into a web page.

The stability is really good. I haven't had any issues with it.

The scalability is good.

The initial setup is easy.

I learned to use it in class, and the setup was quite fast because the teacher really helped us to gain access and take the first few steps. The setup took a few hours at most.

I installed it myself.

I use a free version at present.

Plan how the data will be constructed. I had to delete an entire database and start over because I didn't organize it properly. That was a huge block.

I would rate MySQL at eight on a scale from one to ten.

We're using MySQL for data warehousing and logging.

Even for the best database, we always want the database to perform much better, so we wish MySQL would be much better, in terms of performance. When they release a new version, they mostly concentrate on scalability and performance.

I've been using MySQL for seven years.

The stability of MySQL is good.

MySQL is a fully scalable product.

The initial setup of MySQL was easy and straightforward. You can complete the initial setup for this product within a few hours.

It was the technical team who did the setup for MySQL. We had two or three engineers who took care of the deployment and maintenance of this product.

MySQL is very cheap. In fact, it could be free. They also have a yearly licensing option. I don't remember paying for additional costs, aside from the standard licensing fee.

I evaluated Oracle Database.

I'm using the Enterprise version of MySQL.

MySQL is a good database. We are using it, and we'll continue to use it.

I've never contacted the technical support team for MySQL. I have no complaints.

I can recommend MySQL to others who plan to start implementing it.

We don't ask for new features on a database. When we take a database, we take it because of fixed features, e.g. its current features. It's not an application. It's a database. We are fine with whatever features MySQL offers now. We never really thought about whether we want more features on this product.

I'm rating MySQL an eight out of ten.

We use it for my clients. Basically any website that uses WordPress uses MySQL, so we use that to manage and run our WordPress websites. Some we have on a cloud, some we have at hosted servers.

It is part of WordPress and some clients are using it for eCommerce, and others are just using it as part of the website to give information.

The feature that I have found most valuable is its ubiquity. MySQL is everywhere, so if I need to find a developer to do things to it that I don't know, it's very easy to find someone who has expertise in it.

In terms of what could be improved, there is not anything that I can think of offhand.

Everything related to automation or improvements are external tools that are brought into it, so it has nothing to do with the robustness of the system itself - it is the developers and implementations that touch it. Those can be improved, but MySQL itself is fine as is. 

I would just say that it could be a little bit simpler to use.

I've been using MySQL off and on for about seven years.

Different hosting systems have different iterations of it. Whenever possible, I try to use the latest version, but usually I'm using a model or two back. But I'm not using the original, not by any stretch.

Everything that works with MySQL is stable. If it's a bug, it's due to the developer who has miswritten a piece of code. The code itself is perfect. It's the application of people who attempt to make changes where the issues come in.

In terms of scalability, I have not done anything bigger than a couple hundred people a day on a site, so I really couldn't tell you about that.

Our clients are small businesses, almost all of them with less than 50 employees.

Previously, and I am talking almost 20 years ago, we would have used Microsoft Access, which is not a relational database and it's not iterative, so you can't have multiple people working on it, whereas MySQL is a system-based database, so multiple people can access it at the same time.

In terms of the initial setup, you definitely need to know what you're doing, but it's not illogical. The database rules and how they work are very clear and concise. To execute MySQL is fairly straightforward.

MySQL is open source so it's free.

My advice to anyone considering MySQL is to check the forums and do your homework.

On a scale of one to ten, I would give MySQL a 9. It would be a 10 if it was simpler to use, but as it is, it's about a 9.

It's been used as a primary relational database for most applications. It's scalable and could easily be maintained and could be migrated to any Cloud-based Database as a Service solutions which are compatible with MySQL.e.g. AWS RDS MySQL, AWS RDS Aurora, Google SQL. 

It has improved scalability, easy-maintenance. It is open-source and is easy to use. 

MySQL is open-source. There are a lot of open-source communities trying to come up with their own patches, and to come up with their own features, which help MySQL develop faster than traditional databases like Oracle, which is closed source.

The solution is also compatible with a lot of other databases, like Percona, and it's compatible with MariaDB. It's also compatible with a lot of other shared database solutions.

Since MySQL is mostly used as a relational database in a lot of organizations, a lot of other solutions are being merged with MySQL and it's a rather easy process.

Unlike a lot of closed source services, the new features are solely based on customer feedback. The customer feedback of open source is way larger than the closed source application.

The developers of MySQL, which are Oracle MySQL, Percona, and MariaDB, seem to not be focusing much on object-oriented replication. Basically, replication is based on a text level of replication. There is a text level replication in Oracle, that is so similar it can be implemented in MySQL, however, it needs to pull a lot of resources. They have altered their approach for replication. Still, more focus on object-oriented replication would be good. 

They should come up with a better solution than the NDB cluster for better scaling. If they could come up with a better solution for write scaling, apart from the NDB cluster, which is supported by all open source communities, that would be great. Although the NDB cluster, is an open-source tool, it's not widely supported as a solution.

The latest 8.0 version has come up with whole new features. 

I've been working on Relational Database MySQL throughout my career, i.e. for 14 years. This relational database MySQL is evolved from its MyISAM only engine to InnoDB and is now compatible with other database engines too. e.g. NDB, Galera. 

MySQL is reliable. If you are talking about it in terms of relational databases, MySQL is pretty stable. If you want to go ahead with a quite secure database like any PCI database or a customer-related database or even financial data, it's still feasible to migrate to MySQL. 

There are a lot of features provided by Oracle MySQL, Percona, and MariaDB. They all have their own replication cluster. Percona has XtraDB, MariaDB has GaleraDB, Oracle MySQL has its own cluster as well. MySQL replication is common in all three MySQL flavors. MySQL replication is an excellent read-scalable feature, which has also evolved a lot from its earliest versions to the latest 8.0 version.

The NDB cluster, which has been supported and developed by Oracle, and is based on MySQL, is different than all of the other MySQL replication cluster solutions. It's both read and write scalable. All other cluster features work well for read scaling. NDB cluster is the only cluster feature recorded by Oracle MySQL, which is write scalable as well as re-scalable.

The solution seems to have plenty of technical support due to the fact that there are three companies who are product owners, and therefore there are three companies who are supporting MySQL. They are: Oracle, Percona, and MariaDB. They're doing pretty well. 

There are a lot of companies also that support their customers. This is the good thing about any software which is open-source. A lot of open source communities come up with their own features and they try to patch up with the original source. 

The initial setup has evolved a lot. It's pretty straight forward whether you're using Mac, Windows, Linux, etc. You can set it up on almost every operating system. 

It's supported by the open-source community, and they have plenty of documentation online that users can reference for assistance. If you are working in almost any operating system and you have any questions related to the installation, you'll find the documentation you need.

I am not sure, what the licensing costs are for the solution. From my experience, there is no straightforward cost. You can get that cost from the Oracle website about the Oracle MySQL licensing costs, however, it's not a straightforward price quote for everyone.

If you are an existing customer, you can negotiate and you can get a better quote. The pricing on the website may be for new customers. That said, you can still negotiate. The same is true for Percona and MariaDB as well. 

We are using MySQL 5.6, 5.7, and MySQL 8.0. 

In terms of advice, I'd say when implementing MySQL, if a company has been using any previous relational database, like Oracle, Microsoft SQL or DB2, the easiest way to migrate from any database is from Oracle to MySQL. There'll be some challenges from Microsoft SQL, as well as from DB2 to MySQL. Any existing application which is working with the Oracle database as a backend database, DB2 database as a backend database, or Microsoft as the backend database, should still work fine with MySQL, with minimal code changes. 

MySQL is a product supported by a lot of applications and a lot of organizations. Almost every client and every API would be able to support MySQL. There would still need to be a lot of testing, however, I feel almost all of the applications which need a relational database for their database solution, could leverage out of MySQL. 

We are basically using it for our applications.

I like the JSON stuff.

Since we upgraded from 8.0.12 to 8.0.22, it has had some slowness-related issues. Some of the queries that were fast previously are quite slow now. I did some research, and I found many people complaining about it.

I've been working with this for two and a half years, and they have been using it for 10 to 15 years.

We are using a cluster now, but I don't administrate that. There are thousands of users.

I would rate it a seven out of 10.

We use the solution for our applications, as a management system. We utilize it as an operator or relational database. 

I am totally satisfied with MySQL. I like its performance, ease of use, stability and scalability. 

The solution could have better integration and security features. 

I have been using MySQL for more than five years.

The solution is stable.

The solution is scalable. 

I have no experience with tech support. 

We did not use another solution prior to the current one. 

Installation is easy. It takes about 20 minutes.

One can do the installation on his own. 

Our team involved 15 people. 

There is no licensing fee. 

I believe there are 100 users making use of the solution in our organization.

I would recommend this solution to others. 

We developed a network monitoring software and used MySQL as a backend database.

We utilized the two most common and popular MySQL database engines, MyISAM and InnoDB.

We store collected monitoring data and configuration data on MySQL. Also, our network monitoring solution reporting module is based on the MySQL MyISAM database engine.

We use both Windows and Linux versions of MySQL, and we utilize the backup and recovery features.

To summarize, our primary use case is the embedded DB component for our network management software.

MySQL is a popular database platform for businesses because it is extremely easy to use. It is commonly used in combination with PHP and Java. For instance, someone with little to no knowledge of MySQL can easily establish a database connection and start programming immediately.

So MySQL improved our developing process speed. MySQL is a very popular and well-known database solution, so it is easy to find a MySQL developer.

MySQL performance also improved our NMS solution performance.

MySQL is a fast, easy-to-use RDBMS being used for many small and big businesses.

MySQL advantages and valuable points include:

• MySQL is a very powerful program in its own right. It handles a large subset of the functionality of the most expensive and powerful database packages.
• MySQL uses a standard form of the well-known SQL data language.
• MySQL works on many operating systems and with many languages including PHP, PERL, C, C++, Java, etc.
• MySQL works very quickly and works well, even with large datasets.
• MySQL is very friendly to PHP and Java at the same time. Both PHP and Java are our development languages.

The two most common and popular MySQL database engines are MyISAM and InnoDB. Database engines provide the underlying functionality for MySQL to work with and process data. MyISAM is the default engine for MySQL for versions earlier than 5.5.5 and functions well in most scenarios.

However, depending on your needs, there are situations where another database engine, such as InnoDB, may be the better choice. For example, InnoDB supports transactions, whereas MyISAM does not. InnoDB also provides support for foreign keys, whereas MyISAM does not.

When it comes to supporting big data, there is space to improve upon the database engines that are supported by MySQL. An example of this is the Vertica DB engine (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...), and offering support for it would be valuable.

We have been using MySQL for more than ten years.

Previously, we used MSSQL and switched to MySQL because of performance issues.

After installation, the maintanence is easy for an end-user.

MySQL is released under an open-source license, so you have nothing to pay to use it.

We use this solution for the database.

The connectivity with PHP is quite good.

It is easy to integrate, and the fees are less than Oracle and other services.

MySQL is good but it should be able to handle the large transaction levels that Oracle can. It should be able to manage large amounts of data. We have experienced some issues when we are handling a large amount of data in MySQL.

The memory consumption it's using is very high at times, and the default parameter settings are not quite good automatically. We need to tweak the configuration as per the requirements. This is an area that can be improved by giving some guidelines and direction. 

On the database side, it should be really lightweight, and the data structure should be like MongoDB.

It should put less load on to the memory and it should be able to handle maximum data.

I have been working with MySQL for approximately five years.

The solution is stable but there is an issue with memory consumption at times.

I have not contacted technical support. I am using MySQL with Zabbix and when I have an issue, I contact Zabbix who resolves the issues on their end.

I am a developer and I handle the other side of things. I rely on the DB team to handle the maintenance and deployment. My knowledge is very basic.

It's cheaper than other solutions.

For one level of data, you can use MySQL. However, for large amounts of data, you will have to find other databases.

Overall, it's a good solution.

I would rate MySQL a six out of ten.