MySQL Reviews

We are currently using the 6.8 version and, prior to this, used the 5.3. I use the updated versions.

The licensing of the solution is on the expensive side. 

I have been using MySQL since the very beginning, back in 2009. 

For sure, the solution is very stable. 

The solution is scalable. We have plans to increase the number of users. 

The technical support is fine.

The initial setup is straightforward and very simple. 

Installation can be done on one's own. 

The entire system is simple to maintain, as it is not very big, and this can be done by one person. 

The price of the licensing should be cheaper. 

We pay a yearly subscription fee. 

The solution is good for applications of small scope or for IT. It is sufficient to satisfy the needs of those with limited resources. 

Oracle is the main product in my organization.

There are 60 or 70 people making use of the solution in my organization. 

I would definitely recommend the solution to others. It is good for any solution. 

I rate MySQL as a nine out of ten. 

It is deployed on local servers, and we are using version 8. The whole company uses our database. Our users don't communicate with the database directly. They use a web interface. All programs are deployed using MySQL. We have hundreds of thousands of users accessing MySQL via the website. Two of us manage the database, but it's enough for only one person to manage daily operations. 

As we are using the latest version of the database, it has many functions that have improved it. There are many new features in this version, and it is more powerful in what it can achieve.

MySQL has a lot of documentation, and bug fixing is better in the latest version.

We have been using MySQL for about 20 years.

It is very stable.

MySQL is scalable. We didn't scale it via the database tools provided but on the program side. However, it is easy to scale it using the functions provided with the product.

The support is fast and helps to find faster fixes to existing bugs. They recently advised us to downgrade to fix one particular bug, which resolved the problem we were having.We only use technical support for bug fixes, and the calls are usually closed quickly.

I was able to install it myself in about half an hour.

MySQL is free.

We have also used PhpStorm and DataGrip.

I would recommend that others use MySQL. I would rate it 10 out of 10.

The most valuable feature is the fact that the product is cross-platform, because it reduces server TCO, for my small company. This is very important.

Without MySQL, we used a single centralized database.

With MySQL, we can now have many standalone databases where every developer can perform local tests.

Improvement areas are Security and ORM, for example:

It may be interesting to check the user-level access rights at the row level and a robust support to JSON model object (like NoSQL database).

I've used MySQL for 12 years, since 2005. I chose it after using MS SQL for years. It is more suitable for the projects that we make.

No, never.

Yes, the many index restrictions in case of partitioning the tables.

I do not know yet. I've never used technical support services, only the community

Yes, I first used Microsoft SQL Server, then I went to MySQL because the cost is lower.

The initial setup is straightforward, especially in a Windows environment.

There is no cheap commercial license for standalone applications.

Yes, I have evaluated other database solutions. I have evaluated PostgreSQL and MongoDB.

Simple syntax and simple administration are the most valuable features.

It allows us to maintain very large tables without jumping through the hoops that are required by the commercial products such as Oracle.

Multi-master replication could be a bit more reliable.

Counting the earlier versions, we are using this solution for over ten years.

Compared to the other database solutions, there were no stability issues as such.

Sharding is relatively straightforward.

We run the Community version, so technical support doesn't apply.

We tried Oracle for a while but it was too much of a resource hog.

We looked at Oracle and PostgreSQL.

The multiple engine replication is the most valuable feature. This neuralgic process for billing needs high availability and that is where we need this robust, but simple solution. If one server fails, we switch to the other transparently.

It facilitated fast processing of the millions of records for billing of the the call detail records in the Telecom company. The company needed to recover calls, in addition to immediately detecting frauds in the telephone calls so as to block the line and generate large losses. With the help of stored procedures, functions and triggers, we created an engine to recover most of the calls with a single transaction. Thanks to MySQL.

There were no stability issues.

There were no scalability issues.

I would rate the technical support as a five out of 10.

We were using PostgreSQL. The reason why we switched to this solution was that of the easy administration.

The setup was easy.

It is open source and AWS provides a managed solution.

Amazon has come up with Aurora, a MySQL hybrid that has helped us get up to speed without actually thinking about MySQL underlying optimizations.

Catching up with proprietary technologies like Oracle and PostgreSQL is the challenge right now.

We have used this solution for over four years.

There have been no stability issues yet.

We code for horizontal scaling and hence the only thing that becomes important is the number of connections. The data can be easily replicated in real time on Amazon replicas themselves. We have a dynamic solution to read data from replicas and not from a master instance. That is how we scale.

I would give technical support a rating of 10/10.

We did not use a different solution before.

The initial setup was straightforward.

Keeping something similar to AWS, and as easy as Amazon, will be the best thing for any small business like mine.

I did evaluate other solutions, but MySQL stood out because of its ease of use. Perhaps my prior experience has made me be biased towards MySQL.

Until you have expertise in data migrations and what you are doing with data, MySQL can be really easy and dangerous at the same time. MySQL doesn't give you a warning about data truncation if data types don't fully match. Be really careful on that front.

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.

I used it to obtain insight into the entire network and the resources being utilized. The current GUI lets us see the traffic happening east to west and the total bandwidth consumed by it.

• It provides visibility, where something was either broken or in pieces only.
• It creates a unified view of the entire architecture and performance factor, helping to manage the network more easily.
• It has a remote access feature to manage the database from a remote location. This enables in-work collaboration.

I have found the following features valuable:

• NetFlow of the whole system
• Information flow and scaling
• Communication between multiple collaborators and stakeholders
• Its user-friendly features.

The only service which could be improved is its usability. The entire user experience needs to be revamped to meet the 2018 design standards.

The overall service is great.