Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

MySQL vs Oracle Database In-Memory comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary
 

Categories and Ranking

MySQL
Ranking in Relational Databases Tools
3rd
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.5
Number of Reviews
147
Ranking in other categories
Open Source Databases (1st)
Oracle Database In-Memory
Ranking in Relational Databases Tools
8th
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
8.3
Number of Reviews
29
Ranking in other categories
Embedded Database (3rd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of December 2024, in the Relational Databases Tools category, the mindshare of MySQL is 8.3%, down from 9.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Oracle Database In-Memory is 1.3%, up from 1.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Relational Databases Tools
 

Featured Reviews

Patryk Golabek - PeerSpot reviewer
Good beginner base but it should have better support for backups
As for what can be improved, right now we don't use the MySQL cluster. There is a MySQL cluster that you can run in a standalone mode, like a single database or you can do it in a cluster master-slave implementation. The cluster is not the best when it comes to MySQL. That's why we switched to MariaDB. For that simple reason that the cluster there is better. It's more manageable and it's easier to work with. We decide what to use depending on the needs. For example, if we need to mount something in a cluster mode, we use MariaDB, which again, is a Dockerized solution with a Helm chart as well, and it's very easy for us to deploy and manage, and also to scale when you just increase the number of slave versions. So MySQL doesn't have that great support when it comes to clusters. You can definitely use MySQL for that too, both support clustering, but the MariaDB is better. Additional features that I would like to see included in the next release of this solution include better support for backups. Because if you go with the MySQL Percona version, it gives you the tools to back it up securely. The vanilla version of MySQL doesn't have that. It actually does have it, but it is just really poorly executed. I would improve the backup system as well as the encryption. To make it smoother right now takes too much work. It should be a little bit smoother to backup the encrypted data the way you want it and have the ability to push it anywhere you want. That is not part of it right now. Now it is a database, so you don't know what you're going to do with it. It's difficult. You're just going to come up with solutions. But I think you can generalize here and come up with really simple solutions, which we have already in MySQL. That's probably the one thing that I would try and push right now for people to switch. But people are still not biting, because if you go with the managed version, then all the backups are taken care of for you by Amazon or Google or Microsoft. Then you really don't care. But for us, since we're doing it locally, self-hosted, we would like to have better tools for locking up the data. Right now, one aspect that is also linked to backups is running things in a crosscheck with semi-managed solutions. This requires a bit of a context. Since we're running things within the clustered communities, we're kind of pushing the Cloud into the cluster. We also want to push some of the tools for the database into a cluster, as well. So these are what we call Kubernetes operators. And there's MySQL operators that were first developed by the community. Those kind give you the ability to backup data within the cluster. So now you have a fully managed solution running from your cluster. These are called MySQL Kubernetes operators. We are looking into those right now to upgrade our solution, which would mean that we can just execute our backup natively within Kubernetes, not via special scripts. This would make it much easier to actually deal with any kind of MySQL issues within the cluster, because it would be cluster-native. That's what the operators are for. I think Oracle just created a really good one. It surprised me that they have this. It's not because of Oracle, but they got pushed by the community and actually created the MySQL Operator for Kubernetes, and that's what we're moving towards. This is going to give you an ability to have a cloud-managed solution within the cluster. And then you can ask the MySQL Operator for the database. They'll partition the database and give it to you. So it will change the nature from you deploying it to you just asking the cluster to give you a database. It's a fully managed solution right from the cluster. So that's what we're heavily looking into right now. We'll be switching to using Kubernetes MySQL Operators. It's a high-availability cluster running within the Kubernetes cluster. Right now we're pretty good with that. It's working fine. We're trying to find some time to actually release that globally everywhere. That's where I am right now. But in terms of technology, if you give up Oracle, you just go to a MySQL operator. That's the one we're using, what we're actually looking at - to create, operate and scale mySQL and sell it within the cluster. This idea of having a cognitive MySQL becomes much easier to manage within the cluster, as well. So you don't have to go with the cloud solution with AWS or Google cloud or Amazon MySQL or the Microsoft version. The Oracle SuperCluster is the Oracle MySQL operator. That's what we we are looking into a lot right now. Mainly because it does backups on demand - it's so easy to backup. You can just tell Kubernetes to backup and you don't have to run special scripts or special extra software or codes to back it up. You can make the backup as you would do anything else. Send a backup or some other data source or insert an Elasticsearch into it here. Just say "Kubernetes, back it up" and you know Oracle has this adapters within the cluster to back it up for you taking increments or different companies. So that makes it really nice and easy to use and to deploy. With that kind of solution you can ask to class or petition the database how you want. So again, it changed the nature of the kind of push-to-pull second nature system. Are you pushing your containers to a cluster? You just say cluster, "give me a database" and the class gives you the base partition database, creates a database in a secure manner, gives the connection to the database, and you're done. Then you can back it up on a schedule on to any backup switches. It's much easier. So once this goes, it is going to be widely adopted, which it should be. But I think people might not have the tech skills right now. But once it's adaptive, maybe in a few more months, it's going to be the number one solution for everybody. In terms of what I'd like to see in the next release, one thing that's always missing is dash boarding. There's no real BI tool for MySQL, like there is in Yellowfin and all the different tools that you get. They all have MySQL connectors, but there's no specific BI tool for MySQL. Open source projects have sprung up, but they're more general purpose, like Postgress, a MySQL kind of database, a relational database. I don't see any really nice tool like Cabana for elastic searches that I can tell clients to use because it would be too technical for them. They would have to have more technical engagement with writing the course, drag and drop, and creating a graph like in Power BI where you just connect with DIA. So I'd like to see the grab and drag and drop tables, nice beautiful graphics, and pie charts. You don't necessarily have that with MySQL like you have other solutions, which are really cost prohibitive for some clients. It'd be nice to have an open source solution for that. Decent solutions. I mean decent that I can take to clients. It's so technical. They want to drag and drop.
Duy AnhMai - PeerSpot reviewer
Improved data processing speeds with enhanced security and processing efficiency
We use Oracle Database In-Memory to deploy applications for commercial purposes, store data securely, and ensure efficient data processing Oracle Database In-Memory has improved data storage and processing efficiency, which is crucial for handling large amounts of data in our products and…

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"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."
"MySQL gives us a very user-friendly workspace in which to query the database."
"For sure, the solution is very stable."
"The solution is great for small applications in particular."
"MySQL is easy and convenient for me. I don't need to rely on anyone. I can write the code and extract the information. It is fast if you know how to use it. The solution is not expensive, and most of the developers know how to use it. It is easy to create tables. The solution is stable and has good performance. The connection with AWS gives regular updates, which is manual otherwise and a nightmare."
"The most valuable features are that it's free and the documentation is good."
"It has a remote access feature to manage the database from a remote location. This enables in-work collaboration."
"My main reason for using MySQL for this small customer database company and for some kinds of scientific projects was that I had to do the installation myself. I didn't have a database administration team behind me. Therefore, I was looking for something very easy to handle. MySQL is easy to install, connect, and do all such things."
"The solution's most valuable feature is its performance optimization within our hardware environment."
"The application development is very user-friendly."
"The scalability of the solution is very good. It's able to support large amounts of data."
"I like Oracle because it is a backward-compatible solution."
"Security is the most valuable feature."
"The scalability is very good."
"The most valuable feature is that Database-In-Memory is more consistent and faster than traditional databases as it requires fewer CPUs to process instructions."
"We find the dashboard and the speed of data processing very valuable in Oracle Database In-Memory."
 

Cons

"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."
"The full-text search feature must be improved."
"If the customer is already using or has already used Oracle for a long time they will know the look and feel and the character of this database that can fit into their business."
"Clusters are hard to perform so we use no SQL alternates like MongoDB."
"Its scalability can be better. It is probably not as scalable as Oracle. I had some issues with connectors. I used it from a C++ program, and it required some work to make it run, but finally, it worked."
"We require more ease of use, scalability, and high availability. These are some of the critical features that we use and look for in a product. It should be easier to manage clusters. Scalability is very important for us because our projects and concurrency requirements are quite big. We also require high availability of the server, application, and other things. It should also have more performance-based features or enhancements from the performance point of view. When we divide a database, it should be able to handle the queries very fast."
"If it had something similar to Microsoft’s DTS engine then it would be the best database system out there."
"The solution is expensive."
"We use some partitions in In-Memory. We have a very large table and a low dose. It is very expensive in data to load all of them into In-Memory. It takes up more memory slots in the server, as well as a lot of RAM. We use last partitions on the table. We always need to create a script and make a schedule that can load a last partition in In-Memory. Oracle doesn't have features to do this automatically. I would like them to allow us to load last partitions, as well as other table partitions, in In-Memory. I think a good feature would do that automatically, letting you see a table, load a large partition, and monitor loading memory. It's quite a good feature."
"They should lower the price. My customers think that it's too expensive."
"The product could benefit from enhancements in its graphical user interface."
"The platform’s pricing needs improvement."
"Oracle should include column store or advanced query optimization so a database can be optimized by enabling analytic queries to run faster."
"The query optimization and backup features should be added."
"The solution is quite expensive."
"It would be good if Oracle could reduce downtime when transferring from non-In-Memory to In-Memory."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Can range from free to quite expensive, depending on the environments and requirements, so better to really set goals ahead of setting it up."
"It is open-source."
"The solution’s pricing depends on customer requirements. A license is not required for the community edition."
"The solution does not come with a licensing fee."
"I don't pay for a license."
"The solution is open source so is free."
"There is no cost involved, no licensing fees."
"It is an open source platform."
"The product is expensive."
"The pricing is pretty good so I rate it an eight out of ten."
"The solution's pricing is high."
"It's quite costly and it comes with a fixed price."
"Database In-Memory is priced a bit higher than its competitors like Microsoft."
"There is a need to make a yearly payment towards the licensing costs, after which there is any to pay towards the support cost attached to the solution."
"I rate the pricing a zero out of ten because Database In-Memory is too costly."
"The platform's licensing cost needs improvement."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Relational Databases Tools solutions are best for your needs.
823,875 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
16%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Government
7%
Financial Services Firm
19%
Computer Software Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Government
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

Why are MySQL connections encrypted and what is the biggest benefit of this?
MySQL encrypts connections to protect your data and the biggest benefit from this is that nobody can corrupt it. If you move information over a network without encryption, you are endangering it, m...
Considering that there is a free version of MySQL, would you invest in one of the paid editions?
I may be considered a MySQL veteran since I have been using it since before Oracle bought it and created paid versions. So back in my day, it was all free, it was open-source and the best among sim...
What is one thing you would improve with MySQL?
One thing I would improve related to MySQL is not within the product itself, but with the guides to it. Before, when it was free, everyone was on their own, seeking tutorials and how-to videos onli...
What do you like most about Oracle Database In-Memory?
We can integrate it with any data sources as well.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Oracle Database In-Memory?
Oracle Database In-Memory is very expensive. Additionally, there are extra costs for some features.
What needs improvement with Oracle Database In-Memory?
Oracle Database In-Memory is more expensive than Azure, and the support from the Oracle team is not very good, especially since they do not have a support team in our region.
 

Comparisons

 

Learn More

 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Facebook, Tumblr, Scholastic, MTV Networks, Wikipedia, Verizon Wireless, Sage Group, Glassfish Open Message Queue, and RightNow Technologies.
Shanghai Customs
Find out what your peers are saying about MySQL vs. Oracle Database In-Memory and other solutions. Updated: December 2024.
823,875 professionals have used our research since 2012.