MySQL Reviews

ACID attributes are the most valuable feature, as data reliability is a top concern.

The backend of the production traffic happens at this level.

The dynamic scalability, clustering, dynamic replicas safeguard against failures, ease of setup and use all need to be improved.

• MySQL was originally meant for a single server; now with the 5.7 version, they have introduced the multi-master model but it is on the user to ensure that there is no conflict of data. Also, to add/remove a server from the cluster requires downtime and MySQL won't scale load on its own as it has scaled up/down (the load distribution has to be done on a separate layer).
• MySQL does not understand the clustered model, it is not aware of others in the cluster and won't act as a player in the cluster.
• Data corruption or two different updates to the same record are not sorted in the replicas and needs manual intervention.
• The cluster setup is complex and so is its maintenance.
• It is not equipped to take advantage of the Cloud (AWS, Azure etc) and their pricing models (go as you use).

I have used this solution for two years.

We have seen the corruption of data in replication when used with filters and also, with the growing data response time dwindles.

A lot of manual effort is needed to scale the solution; a lot of room for improvement is there.

The setup was of mid-level complexity.

It is a GPL license, only the support is priced but as there is a good community so buying support is optional.

I wasn't involved as this predates me at the organization, but today if this re-happens MySQL won't be the best choice.

Do your research and make sure for your use case that MySQL is the best choice, before making any commitments.

I do not recall which version I am using. 

Although we do not use it for the main core system, the solution acts as a database which is useful for login applications, data warehousing. 

The solution is so stable. I have encountered no problems. 

The solution could be more secure.

I have been using MySQL for a year. 

The solution is very stable. 

The solution is not scalable at present. 

I do not have experience with technical support. 

Previously, we used Microsoft database.

The solution is easy to install.

I cannot state how long implementation took. 

The solution does not come with a licensing fee. 

I do not know the number of users who are using the solution in my organization. 

I would absolutely recommend this solution to others. 

I rate MySQL as a seven out of ten. 

On-premises

We are an asset management product company. Our product is deployed on the cloud and the backend database for it is MySQL.

The technical support should be more knowledgeable and available worldwide.

We have been using MySQL for the past five to six years.

So far, it has been pretty stable and I haven't had any problems. We plan to continue using it in the future.

MySQL is very scalable, so I don't expect any challenges.

We have a contract with a third-party for support. So far, it has been working fine for us and I don't see any challenges. That said, having worldwide support is something that would be an improvement.

Prior to MySQL, we did not use another database for this purpose. We built our core product directly on top of MySQL.

The initial setup seemed pretty decent, so I don't see any challenge in that regard.

Our in-house DBA team installed it. We have one DBA and one junior.

This is a good product and I recommend it to others.

We use it as a data store and from that perspective, we get everything we need. We don't have any complaints about features such as analytics, reports, or dashboards.

I would rate this solution a six out of ten.

On-premises

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 would rate them an eight out of ten.

On-premises

Primary DBMS solution for web apps developed on either ASP.NET MVC or Zend / PHP for customers.

The community version of MySQL only offers simple backup and restore tools, but it is OK for many web dev projects for customers that want a low budget solution.

We do software development for our customers on both Windows and Linux. Since these tools are available for both Windows and Linux, we can leverage the knowledge of these tools for development on both platforms.

We design web solutions for customers with PHP (Linux) and ASP.NET MVC (Windows). MySQL offers a simple, no frills, but effective DBMS solution with a very low hardware footprint. Since it has no licensing fees, it offers great TCO for our customers.

Only one of the engines, InnoDB, supports ACID transaction control. The best performance engine, MyISAM, has no transactional control support.

It would make a lot of sense to include one engine that offers both very good overall performance and transactional control support.

All versions of MySQL, including the Community Server version include in its design as a Pluggable Storage Engine Architecture.

This architecture allows for the support of multiple options of Storage Engines, so, a software architect can design a sofware solution with MySQL based on a specific Storage Engine that is capable to cater to a particular type of storage use case requirements, like for instance, web applications with heavy read workloads and moderate write workloads, or intranet desktop applications with heavy write workloads.

Depending on the version of Community Server installed is the list of available Storage Engines: All it takes is the execution of the command SHOW ENGINES to retrieve the list of installed Storage Engine plugins.

When you create any given table in MySQL, you have the option to select what Storage Engine (among the engines available) will be applied to said table. If this option is no explicitly mentioned at the end of the "CREATE TABLE" command, the current default storage engine will be assumed.

For web apps with intensive read workloads and moderate write workloads, the engine that offers a good overall performance is the MyISAM engine, but this does not support ACID transaction control, and it uses a table-level locking mechanism (thus, from a performance standpoint, this is not proper for apps with heavy write workloads).

The InnoDB engine uses a record-level locking mechanism, so, it is proper for apps with heavy write workloads. It also supports Isolation Levels, which is important for applications that have many clients doing read and write operations concurrently.

The other storage engines offer support for very specific use cases, like for instance, flat file tables (CSV engine) or memory-only tables (Memory engine).

Getting back to the InnoDB engine, it offers features that are similar to the database engine in SQL Server, and according to some of benchmarks that we have run, SQL Server Express provides overall better performance than MySQL Community Server with InnoDB tables.

My "Room for Improvement" comment is that it would be great if in the future Oracle were to provide with the Community Server edition a version of InnoDB with better overall performance, while still requiring a small hardware footprint.

More than five years.

As with any good DBMS, MySQL requires periodic DBA maintenance. If you leave a MySQL database with no supervision of a DBA for enough time, files become too fragmented and they may turn corrupt beyond rescue.

The version of the product with free licensing does not offer stellar scalability support. We only use these tools for solutions that do not require such a level of scalability.

The version of the product with free licensing only offers community forum support. Because it is a very popular product, there are many free resources on the internet to search for solutions to most issues.

This kind of "free support" is OK, because we do not use these tools for mission critical solutions.

For Windows development of non-critical solutions, we previously used SQL Server Express exclusively. However, now we use either SQL Server Express or MySQL, depending on the customer. We have not switched from SQL Server Express to MySQL.

The admin tools offered by MySQL Workbench are very good. For an experienced DBA, it is rather easy to setup a (MySQL) server for development, testing, pre-production, or production environments.

Implementation was done with in-house team.

With no licensing fees, the business opportunity is great for both the customer and an ISV like my company. This is the case, as long as you use these tools for non-critical solutions.

We did evaluate other solutions, mainly PostGreSQL, which is also a very good product.

We run a benchmark comparison first, then we run a small lab with the development of a small solution with both toolsets (MySQL and PostGreSQL).

In this development comparison, we found that the winner is MySQL. MySQL toolset for development offers much more coverage for both PHP and C# development.

Most small and medium enterprises require many non-critical solutions. They clearly they do not have large budgets for these kinds of solutions, so it makes a lot of sense to consider MySQL as a good option for this kind of development.

The advice is to make sure that it works for your company and for your customers.

I couldn't name just one most valuable feature. You can use it under different cases, but most of the time I needed the database as a part of my project. I think, in one moment you will prefer the InnoDB database, so you can store and execute procedures and roll-backs.

Again, I couldn't name an positive aspect precisely. Maybe, the fact that using MySQL and Java gives it a big portability and, at the same time, short time responses within your product (my case). This could come from the DB side. It also allows for easiness of finding interaction tools with MySQL.

None that I can name. At the moment I worked with MySQL, there was nothing I couldn't do with the product.

I've been using it for four to five years.

There were no issues with the deployment.

It's a pretty stable product for what I needed it to do.

There have been no issues scaling it.

Being a community product, you can find solutions all over the internet. It's not a specific support department.

There was no solution in use previously.

It was quite easy. The product comes with an installer. It can be complicated to configure the MySQL server, but with a little attention, all goes well.

It was done in-house.

It's free.

It helped me within my projects. For a free product, it works very well and it's easy to use and configure.

Don't try the most sophisticated products, that have big names, and cost a ton. Just try this product if you need something cheap and reliable. I don't think it will disappoint, at least not in my case.

MySQL is open source, highly extensible and scalable, and is available from a web interface via PHPMyAdmin, which is excellent because it's platform independent.In almost all instances that I have used MySQL, it has handled whatever I threw at it and hasn't failed me yet.

It is a community driven project, which means that support is sometimes scarce and hard to find. Also, it really doesn't have an IDE per-se, like MSSQL does.

I use MySQL on a regular basis, specifically whenever I am managing or installing a Wordpress instance. Combined with PHPMyAdmin, MySQL is an excellent database solution for small to medium sized businesses or installations. I would recommend using a better supported database like Oracle or MSSQL for mission critical tasks on an enterprise level, but MySQL is completely capable of performing the same tasks as those other databases.