MySQL Reviews

It is an ideal database to use online learning environments and SMEs. It works well with  Moodle, the open-source learning solution, and is the defacto standard for that product as Moodle is written in PHP which generally goes hand-in-hand with MySQL. As it is an open-source and free solution it is an economical method of storing important companies or small business data. At the same time, it offers a rich set of functions comparable to other large-scale enterprise solutions such as SQL Server and Oracle. 

MySQL is easy to configure, use, and implement. It is free, and cost-effective, with a powerful plethora of tools. It has improved my organization for my clients using Moodle and MySQL databases, as problems are usually easier to fix quickly, and the database resources can be optimized, easily. Even though it is not as sophisticated as SQL Server and Oracle solutions, it is the database of choice for most Moodle implementations. It has a history of reliability, which is always useful in a business environment.

The Cross-platform support for MySQL is great, as you don't need to worry about which platform or operating system you need to install the platform. This allows for interoperability.

Like other databases, it has a rich set of functions, such as stored procedures and its own procedural language, which is akin to Oracle SQL. It also has trigger and cursor commands you would expect with a good database language.

Views are updateable, which is useful when you need to amend a specific view of data for different circumstances.

It has it's own Data Definition Language (DDL), and provides an Information Schema, to view what is "under the bonnet" of your database.

MySQL tutorials and guides could be improved. Often they are too complex for someone with no database experience to understand. 

It is not an easy database to learn for the novice, and very often users need to take a course, employ the use of an online tutor, or IT professional to assist. Also, it is known that it is often difficult to locate guides for specific functions for developers.

It might be good to have some way of creating web services easier, rather than having to write a User Defined Function (UDF) in PHP.

I have been using MySQL for about 10 years.

MySQL has a reputation for stability, and that is one of the reasons it is so popular. Because it is easily available, just works, and can be integrated reasonably easily into other software, it is often the default platform of choice. 

It has been around for years, and chances are it will be around for the next 10 years or so, as new versions continue to evolve.

MySQL is scalable for SMEs and works on a number of different operating systems.

I have not had many issues with MySQL in the past, so I rarely use the support service.

I have used various databases in the past, but for my current business needs, MySQL is ideal.

It was a simple setup, as it was included in the Moodle installation process for implementing learning sites.

ROI is not applicable, as MySQL is open source and is free, so you could say it is only the investment of implementing the database in your environment.

Pricing depends on the size of your business. For an individual to SME sized business the MySQL solution should be adequate for your needs. Setup costs are minimal.

Yes, but for Moodle Learning sites, SQL Server is more complex, and is not multi-platform, Oracle is not recommended for Moodle, but the nearest to MySQL is ProstgreSQL. MySQL is reliable and easy to use. 

You do need to have technical knowledge of databases in general, but MySQL is not too difficult to learn if used alongside PHPMyAdmin, but there are other tools you could consider, such as MySQL Workbench.

MYSQL is our main database. We use it for every project.

I use it for storage procedures, SQL administration, and database administration.

We also use it for the development of reports, and projects that are deployed for our customers. It is also used to develop applications.

The majority of companies use it for their development projects.

It's free. I'm in a big organization, with more than 100,000 employees. If you have to buy a database management system for every project, it would be very expensive. 

Considering the cost-free option, you can use it for POCs,(proof of concept projects), and you can deploy it for customers to reduce project costs. The principal reason is that it is cheap.

Mysql is free : it's an open source project, so you can use it with no cost.

Mysql is well documented, and has a big community.

MySQL adheres to the current SQL standard, although with significant restrictions and a large number of extensions. Through the configuration setting sql-mode you can make the MySQL server behave for the most part compatibly with others like IBM DB/2 and Oracle.

There are a number of convenient user interfaces for administering a MySQL server.

MySQL has supported the storing and processing of two-dimensional geographical data. Thus MySQL is well suited for geographic information systems applications.

MySQL supports the ODBC interface.

For client programming you can use, among others, the languages C#, C, C++, Java, Perl, PHP and Python.

I would like to see a feature added to be able to handle high availability, which would allow us to scale the database or the system on many platforms.

Scalability has to be improved, as you have only one instance of the application, or two, or more instances at max that are connected on one instance of MySQL.

In the next release, I would like to see the scalability features improved to allow you to configure it and reduce the complexity with the configuration, making it easier for the end-user to scale. Make it as simple as it can be.

Add the possibility to define custom data types 

Add OLAP and backup capabilities

I have been using MySQL for more than five years.

It is stable, and in fact, it's more stable than PostgreSQL. Also, recovery is faster.

Scalability is difficult. You can scale it horizontally, but once you have many instances, it is difficult.

You can improve the server, resources that are available, and the processor is good but if you want to scale it on many instances than it is a bit complex.

We use it for customers. We have 10 instances of MySQL independently, on the project we are currently working with.

It's an open-source solution. There is documentation available on the internet, that provides enough to resolve issues quickly.

If you are a technician with practice, there is no issue, it's easy to handle. The documentation is available on the internet. You have everything you need quickly if you are autonomous.

It's easy, you just download it, install it and click next until it's complete.

It's an open-source database management system that can be used free of charge.

I am not using the user interface because I'm a developer. Generally, I just try to find how to use the command-line interface to access what I want for the system.

Oracle is still the best, but it's too expensive.

Before purchasing this solution, know the needs of your environment and be sure that you don't have to scale it. If you want to scale it you will require more knowledge on the product and you will need more support for it.

If you have a little project with a thousand users connected to the instances, it will be able to be scaled. But if you are looking to be able to handle large volumes this is not a good solution for your needs.

If am comparing MySQL with other free solutions then I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.

We primarily use the solution for the many small applications we use. However, we do not use it with our enterprise-level applications.

The solution is very simple. It's easy to use. That's the most important feature. 

We do have it supported by various programs we run with it.

The replication needs improvement. It's becoming a native cloud product like Oracle DB or Cockroach DB.

We started using MySQL in various products about 10 years ago when it was still an independent community product.

The solution has proven to be quite stable. We haven't experienced any bugs or glitches.

According to our experience, it's not really an enterprise tool that you can easily expand and scale the way you can with, for example, Oracle. It's good for small to medium-sized applications. It is not ideal for very big applications.

We have a data center that uses the application and it isn't very heavy on traffic. It basically runs on its own. We only use it occasionally. It's like a co-operation management system.

We do plan to increase usage, but we plan on looking at different databases. We're in the process of researching how scaling up would work. Chances are, we'll need to move to a different platform.

We've never been in touch with technical support. For us, so far, things have been working perfectly so there hasn't been a need to.

This is the first solution we've used. We don't use any other product. It's very popular with the in-house program, as we advised them to stick with this application.

We've used the solution for ten years and the setup hasn't changed much over time. It is, more or less, simple when you compare it to other databases. 

Deployment takes less than an hour.

It only takes one person to maintain the solution. The individual doesn't have to be an engineer. They just need to be a support person.

We don't need a consultant for the implementation. This is used by someone in our company that uses databases and has an average knowledge of the product. We don't even need a vendor. We can handle setup ourselves at this point. It's not like Oracle or other products that can be quite complicated.

We use the community edition of the solution.

We didn't evaluate anything before choosing this solution. However, there are a few new products coming up that are growing in popularity and we will need to research them. Products like the Cockroach DB, Nuo DB, etc. are on our radar to be evaluated in the future.

The most important thing other potential users need to do is to look at the use cases for this application and to evaluate how it's able to handle heavy loads, etc. Users should evaluate how it handles high-traffic. They'll need to ask themselves: is the solution usable for my applications? 

I'd rate the solution seven out of ten.

We use MySQL to manage business intelligence reports by linking them with Oracle database and Power BI. 

I like MySQL's feature that helps to automate things. 

The solution is expensive. 

I have been using the product for five years. 

I would rate MySQL's stability a ten out of ten. 

My company has two users for the solution. 

We have not contacted support until now. We have an onboarding manual. 

The tool's installation is not complex but you need to have experience to set it up. You need to download the solution and pay for it. The installation can be done within an hour. 

You need to pay upgrade costs every year. 

I would rate MySQL a nine out of ten. 

We have used the solution to manage database administration and custom attributes.

The solution has all the essential features. We can manipulate bulk data, clean up data, divide it into compartments, and optimize it.

There should be a training platform for the solution without the complexities of owning a server partition in our system.

I rate the solution's stability a ten.

It is a scalable solution. We have 1200 solution users in our organization.

The solution's initial setup was straightforward.

I rate the solution as a ten. I advise others to have durable resources to handle the operations of MySQL systems.

Below are a few instances where MySQL is utilized. Typically, I have worked on RPA projects. To preserve or update data from the database, I must create a database and data tables, which can be used again in the future or by other processes. Additionally, the data can be shared. I need to store and manage the data for reporting and management purposes.

The tasks I perform, mostly involve sorting, patching, and maintaining data, as well as creating stored procedures.

MySQL's most significant attribute is its capability to create, modify, and maintain databases. This is crucial and advantageous in procedures, such as SOAR. Therefore, all SQL functions are beneficial to any backend developer or developer who requires data storage.

The solution is easy to use and the user interface has worked well in my usage.

Improvements to MySQL depend on the specific use case. For example, in my scenario, I frequently need to maintain and store data, which can then be utilized to generate reports. On the other hand, others may suggest incorporating a feature that allows for easier visualization of the data, such as what is available in Power BI or other similar tools.

I have been using MySQL for approximately five years.

I rate the stability of MySQL an eight out of ten.

We have four to five people using this solution.

I rate the scalability of MySQL an eight out of ten.

I rate the support of MySQL a nine out of ten.

Positive

The initial setup of MySQL is simple. Anyone can do it.

I rate the initial setup of MySQL a nine out of ten.

I can implement the solution by reading the documentation.

We have been looking into another solution called Microsoft Dataverse but it's not accessible to all the processes for our use cases. Additionally, we are evaluating Amazon AWS. We are finding solutions to fit our client's needs.

If an individual is not currently utilizing MySQL, I would advise them to investigate its efficacy in managing and modifying data. Its numerous features can streamline these tasks significantly. For those interested in starting with MySQL, it provides an all-in-one solution for their needs, allowing them to complete numerous tasks with ease. Moreover, I would suggest using available tools to learn how to use MySQL effectively.

I rate MySQL a ten out of ten.

MySQL is user-friendly, making it easy to maintain and modify data. It offers robust security features that enable restricted access based on user permissions. Additionally, it's efficient in loading data and performs faster than many other databases. Users can expect speedy results without encountering significant delays.

Due to the open source licensing model, it has allowed small businesses like ours to adopt enterprise-grade database systems without incurring significant licensing costs.

• Open-source
• Multi-platform
• Lightweight
• Simple to set up, configure and tune
• Support for enterprise-grade features like clustering, master-slave replication, even Sharding (to some extent) which is an advanced feature

It would be helpful if there were a graphical user interface to administer, configure, and tune it.

If it had something similar to Microsoft’s DTS engine then it would be the best database system out there.

For the scale at which my systems are operating, the software is stable. We are at most dealing with less than 10 million rows of data across all tables, and concurrent connections under 200 at our peak loads.

No scalability issues at the scale at which my systems are operating. One thing I did encounter with an earlier version of MySQL 5 – the mysql process will not automatically use available CPU cores on the server, even if it was a dual or quad core CPU. I was troubleshooting a scalability issue when I saw this, it maxed out just a single core and left the other three (in my quad core CPU server) idle. There was a specific condition / trigger that will make the mysql process span the other available cores (I can’t recall now but a quick googling likely will uncover this).

We did not subscribe to professional support from MySQL AB or Oracle. However, the wealth of community support is outstanding. Most of the issues faced could be resolved by knowledge shared by the MySQL community.

I’ve used SQL Server and Oracle for database systems. SQL Server is an excellent solution, in particular the DTS (Data Transformation System) which is not available for MySQL. Switching to MySQL for two reasons: 1) licensing costs 2) the application supports MySQL primarily, and has poor support for SQL Server.

Very easy to set up, relatively easy to configure, tune, and use the conf file, as long as you are comfortable mucking around in Linux conf text files and working from the command line (I am).

You could use the installer which would be the easiest way, but setting up by hand is not too difficult either – instructions can be found online and following them step by step usually works fine.

MySQL Enterprise Support is not cheap, though might still be cheaper than Oracle or SQL Server. They may not have local support depending on where you’re based, but there are many smaller agencies out there that will readily provide support. You’ll need to spend some time looking around.

I’d been using other database systems like Microsoft’s SQL Server and Oracle Database before trying out MySQL. There are forks of MySQL maintained outside of Oracle, like MariaDB and Aurora (by Amazon Web Services). I have not really tried them but I don’t expect very big differences; in fact, for most use cases you may not observe any difference. There would be the few unique features in MariaDB and Aurora that are not present in the original MySQL feature set (I know there are but don’t remember the specifics).

As long as your application supports it well, and you are familiar with the scaling options and its limitations, you can’t go very wrong with MySQL, as it is a very mature product by now. If you are fairly competent with servers and databases you could start off without subscribing to Enterprise Support, and may be able to get by quite well. If things get more complicated, or scalability starts to become a problem, then you may consider paying for help.

The most valuable feature of MySQL is auto-scaling.

The GUI could improve to make MySQL better.

I have been using MySQL for approximately four years.

The stability of MySQL is good.

MySQL can scale well.

I have used the support and level three support is great.

The initial setup of MySQL was straightforward.

We have not seen a return on investment.

The price of the solution is good because we have a good partner.

The solution is good at scaling.

I rate MySQL a ten out of ten.