MySQL Reviews

It has a relational database system. Client/Server Architecture SQL compatibility (Structured Query Language) .MySQL has the features of the current SQL standard (at the moment SQL: 2003). SubSELECTs: From version 4.1, MySQL is capable of processing a query in the form of SELECT * FROM tablename1 WHERE x IN (SELECT y FROM tablename2). MySQL supports views from MYSQL version 5.0. Stored procedures: Is capable of storing codes: MySQL has supported SPs since version 5.0. Triggers: MySQL has supported triggers in a limited form from version 5.0 Unicode: MySQL has supported all conceivable character sets since version 4.1, including Latin-1, Latin-2, and Unicode (either in the variant UTF8 or UCS2). User interface: There are a number of convenient user interfaces for administering a MySQL server. Full-text search: Full-text search simplifies and accelerates the search for words that are located within a text field. If you employ MySQL for storing text (such as in an Internet discussion group), you can use full-text search to simply implement an efficient search function. Has got statement-based replication. It's one of the simplest ways to create databases.

DELETE and UPDATE statements that use a LIMIT clause without an ORDER BY are non deterministic. Statements using any of the following functions cannot be replicated properly using statement-based replication: LOADFILE (), USER ().

The best features in MySQL, making it one of the most used databases globally, are- 1) Multi-threaded architecture for multiple CPU utilization and kernel threading 2) Use of triggers and crash recovery techniques 3) Indexed Conditional Pushdown 4) Integration with LAMP/WAMP 5) Easy setup with Memcached for increasing performance and scalability

Few cons in MySQL are 1) Increased complexity in InnoDB 2) Slower performance when using InnoDB as compared to MyISAM for using simple queries 3) Only identical MyISAM tables can be merged. 4) No active directory integration as in SQL server 5) It does not support check constraints

MySQL is indeed the world's most popular open source database. It has been designed on the hyper threading infrastructure and supports multi-threaded architecture for using multiple CPU's. It works on index compression with B-Tree disk tables popularly known as MyISAM. Its efficiency depends on the implementation of SQL functions with optimization of library classes.

We use it for my clients. Basically any website that uses WordPress uses MySQL, so we use that to manage and run our WordPress websites. Some we have on a cloud, some we have at hosted servers.

It is part of WordPress and some clients are using it for eCommerce, and others are just using it as part of the website to give information.

The feature that I have found most valuable is its ubiquity. MySQL is everywhere, so if I need to find a developer to do things to it that I don't know, it's very easy to find someone who has expertise in it.

In terms of what could be improved, there is not anything that I can think of offhand.

Everything related to automation or improvements are external tools that are brought into it, so it has nothing to do with the robustness of the system itself - it is the developers and implementations that touch it. Those can be improved, but MySQL itself is fine as is. 

I would just say that it could be a little bit simpler to use.

I've been using MySQL off and on for about seven years.

Different hosting systems have different iterations of it. Whenever possible, I try to use the latest version, but usually I'm using a model or two back. But I'm not using the original, not by any stretch.

Everything that works with MySQL is stable. If it's a bug, it's due to the developer who has miswritten a piece of code. The code itself is perfect. It's the application of people who attempt to make changes where the issues come in.

In terms of scalability, I have not done anything bigger than a couple hundred people a day on a site, so I really couldn't tell you about that.

Our clients are small businesses, almost all of them with less than 50 employees.

Previously, and I am talking almost 20 years ago, we would have used Microsoft Access, which is not a relational database and it's not iterative, so you can't have multiple people working on it, whereas MySQL is a system-based database, so multiple people can access it at the same time.

In terms of the initial setup, you definitely need to know what you're doing, but it's not illogical. The database rules and how they work are very clear and concise. To execute MySQL is fairly straightforward.

MySQL is open source so it's free.

My advice to anyone considering MySQL is to check the forums and do your homework.

On a scale of one to ten, I would give MySQL a 9. It would be a 10 if it was simpler to use, but as it is, it's about a 9.

We use the solution for our applications, as a management system. We utilize it as an operator or relational database. 

I am totally satisfied with MySQL. I like its performance, ease of use, stability and scalability. 

The solution could have better integration and security features. 

I have been using MySQL for more than five years.

The solution is stable.

The solution is scalable. 

I have no experience with tech support. 

We did not use another solution prior to the current one. 

Installation is easy. It takes about 20 minutes.

One can do the installation on his own. 

Our team involved 15 people. 

There is no licensing fee. 

I believe there are 100 users making use of the solution in our organization.

I would recommend this solution to others. 

We use this solution for the database.

The connectivity with PHP is quite good.

It is easy to integrate, and the fees are less than Oracle and other services.

MySQL is good but it should be able to handle the large transaction levels that Oracle can. It should be able to manage large amounts of data. We have experienced some issues when we are handling a large amount of data in MySQL.

The memory consumption it's using is very high at times, and the default parameter settings are not quite good automatically. We need to tweak the configuration as per the requirements. This is an area that can be improved by giving some guidelines and direction. 

On the database side, it should be really lightweight, and the data structure should be like MongoDB.

It should put less load on to the memory and it should be able to handle maximum data.

I have been working with MySQL for approximately five years.

The solution is stable but there is an issue with memory consumption at times.

I have not contacted technical support. I am using MySQL with Zabbix and when I have an issue, I contact Zabbix who resolves the issues on their end.

I am a developer and I handle the other side of things. I rely on the DB team to handle the maintenance and deployment. My knowledge is very basic.

It's cheaper than other solutions.

For one level of data, you can use MySQL. However, for large amounts of data, you will have to find other databases.

Overall, it's a good solution.

I would rate MySQL a six out of ten.

On-premises

We are using it for RADIUS protocol, which is for network access. We are tracking the duration of user stations.

Table partitioning is most valuable. It is easy to use.

I am looking for the Temporal SQL feature, which basically means that there is complete history for each table. This feature is currently available in MariaDB.

PostgreSQL has something called a foreign-data wrapper, which is another way to access external data from inside. MySQL could have a similar feature.

I have been using this solution intermittently for six months. 

It is stable.

It is scalable. We currently have six users.

I don't have any experience with their technical support.

Its initial setup was straightforward. It took 10 minutes.

I did it myself. We have two people for its deployment and maintenance.

I am not paying, but I am not sure about the exact licensing requirements.

It is always compared with PostgreSQL and Microsoft SQL Server.

I would recommend this solution to others. I plan to keep using it.

I would rate MySQL an eight out of ten.

On-premises

We only support the backend and only carry it as a database. You can do what you want on the database to create the schema and to manage the rest of the organization.

Errors that come from MySQL need to be more clear. In Oracle, for example, you have the aura and you have numbers, you can easily find the error. MySQL should follow the same as in Oracle.

Stability needs improvement and the backup needs to be enhanced.

We have been using MySQL for years.

We are using the latest version. Normally we do upgrades and we follow the upgrade path.

It could be more stable.

We have 15 customers, but I am not sure of the number of users we have.

I have not dealt with technical support.

It was easy to install. It only took ten minutes.

We have a huge database team as we are supporting many regions.

We implemented this solution ourselves.

We plan to continue using this product. It's good, and I can recommend it to others.

I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.

Hybrid Cloud

We are interfacing it with MicroStrategy. There are ODBC connections. We have 10 to 12 users in our company.

We are assessing the possibilities of moving to the cloud. We are not yet sure if we are going to move to the cloud.

The replication feature is the most valuable. We are replicating our servers.

It should have some code analytical functions. It can also have a monitoring tool.

I have been using MySQL for ten years.

It is stable. We are not dealing with a huge database. Our database is not more than 1 TB, so we didn't find any problem.

I haven't seen a need for scalability.

Their technical support is good.

The initial setup is easy. We are using it on Linux, and our server is on CentOS.

I would recommend this solution. I would rate MySQL a nine out of ten. I find it almost perfect.

Private Cloud