MySQL Reviews

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.

We utilize the DB as a data-repository solution for our front-end applications. The solution gives us the ability to run numerous instances on various geographical cloud servers.

Yes, MySQL has improved numerous processes; it has given us the ability to create applications without absorbing major costs.

• Its ease of use
• It's secure.
• It's fast.
• It has high-end processing.
• It can distribute across clouds.
• It has the ability to run on any operating system.

• I think a better front end would be a better solution (web application front end, similar to what Red Hat is doing to Fedora). 
• Another nice solution for MySQL clustering would be the use of Webmin. 
• Also, security measures could always be improved, and the clustering process could be enhanced as well. I recommend using UFW, iptables, and firewalld.

The solution works extremely well. It is easy to install and works on any platform. The price is good because we utilize various versions of the software/DB.

If the user sets up DB up using MySQL Cluster (creates a grid type of design), then we find the solution from a hardware perspective using NVMe, NVMe-oF, 10GE network connections, and 32-100GB of DDR4 memory (dependent upon customer requirements). 

Scalability can be initiated using high-speed connections across IPv6 connections (IPSec AES-256 ESP/AH VPN connections without purchasing VPN concentrators — this can be done at the network layer).

We use various versions, but most of the time this is based on the client's requirements.

After the initial training, the installation worked pretty well. I would suggest setting it up in a lab. This gives the user room to test the installation and configuration process. It is recommended to use PhpMySQLadmin — (https://www.phpmyadmin.net) — after the installation process is completed.

It was implemented in-house. Most of the applications are tested in our cloud and on-premise servers.

60% ROI (There are DLs — direct labor costs and overhead costs, but once it is set up, we image the configuration and deploy our designs in docker).

I would suggest testing MariaDB before jumping in. This will give the user the ability to test the DB before using it. It is very easy to set up. MariaDB is free, and licensing is based on GNU.

N/A.

I would suggest running tests against MySQL, MariaDB, Oracle, PostgreSQL, and MS SQL to determine which one best suits your needs (cost, development, and integration should all play in your decision-making process).

I'm a tester, an optimization tester. It's basically when the developers have the back-end in SQL. We go and test it out for them and check that the table updated correctly, and we do something on the front-end.

To give you an example, initially we didn't have a database server as such, and we had to make use of some database. Now we use something where we can share the instances of the database which were created virtually, which is a very good feature, which I felt has improved our organization.

The most important features would be querying, the query language where you have the data definition or data modification language, as well. In some cases, we have to create our own tables for testing purposes. In that case, having SQL Server is much easier compared to what's available.

I feel that some tools which make it easier to create queries or make it easier for other functions would be really interesting to see.

More than five years.

Pretty much since we have our own in-house SQL branch, the administrators are there, so they take care of the stability with the product. As far as I've seen, there really hasn't been much of an issue with stability.

 It's pretty scalable.

I haven't contacted them, so I have no experience with them. We generally have an internal team which would work on it. So our point of contact is an internal team, rather than going to MySQL.

I've used a lot of different solutions. MySQL is one of the top among them. Usability and scalability are some of the reasons we went with MySQL.

It was pretty straightforward. No hassles with the setup. 

Usually the setup is done by the IT admin guys, but it was pretty straightforward. The IT admin guys had to come in and give us the rights to install it.

I'm not sure about pricing, I don't deal with the pricing. It's an organization decision.

There were many options.

No one tool fits the bill for every company. Do a feasibility study, and get to know what is can do before going in and developing.