Oracle MySQL Cloud Service Reviews

I use the product for simple content management projects and to manage some open-source applications.

The product is easy to use if we have cPanel to set up the database. It is very easy to start working with the product. The product has tools like Workbench for consuming the database.

We often have to find third-party services to deploy the front end to the back end. The user interface is not simple.

MySQL should develop a solution for querying and constructing databases online.

I have been using the solution for more than 15 years.

The solution is very stable. I rate the stability a ten out of ten.

The product is not as scalable as other solutions. I rate the scalability an eight out of ten.

The initial setup is difficult.

The solution’s paid plans are expensive.

Overall, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.

We use the solution as a mobile app to provide and make services for customers.

The cost of the solution is great. It’s very important to us that it is affordable.

It's easy to use.

The support is great. It meets the needs of the applications that we develop.

It’s easy to set up.

The solution is stable.

The scalability is good.

We aren’t currently missing any features.

There could be more courses where the people could learn more easily how to use the tool.

I’ve been using the solution for five years.

The solution is stable. It’s reliable. the performance is good. there are no bugs or glitches and it doesn’t crash or freeze.

The product can scale well.

50 people are using the solution right now.

Every time that we have contacted technical support, the service has been okay. We don’t have any complaints. Nothing needs to be improved.

The implementation process is simple.

The pricing is reasonable.

We’re using the enterprise version. I’m not sure which version number we are on right now.

It’s easy to implement and affordable. I’d recommend the solution to others.

I’d rate the solution nine out of ten.

We specialize in providing solutions for Oracle's complexity, making it easier for businesses to navigate and manage their data effectively. We utilize a KPI monitoring solution to collect and transfer data into Oracle for data processing workflow.

The access to a suite of management and administration tools that simplify tasks such as database provisioning, configuration, and monitoring.

It can be quite challenging to work with, and it's not known for its user-friendliness. It requires a significant amount of expertise and effort to manage, especially when dealing with substantial volumes of data.

I have been working with it for two years.

The system is generally stable; however, during month-end processes that involve calculations and data aggregation, we have experienced occasional delays.

The current solution lacks scalability and there's room for improvement in that aspect. Right now, I'm developing products for end-users, with around three to four hundred employees utilizing screens, seeking to enhance their user experience and efficiency in generating reports and outputs.

The customer support provided is highly commendable. However, it's a commonly held perception that this support can be costly in Korea. While the core solution itself is not exorbitant, the support services are associated with a significant maintenance fee, often ranging from twenty to thirty percent.

Positive

The installation process can be quite challenging. To streamline this, we don't install Oracle directly. Instead, we opt for a method involving copying code, which is time-consuming.

This process entails creating spaces, and it consumes a significant amount of time. However, once we have an Oracle database established, we can conveniently duplicate it to create an identical setup. This allows us to create another space, acquire the necessary licenses, and overall make the process much more straightforward. The deployment process typically spans several days, and the number of required personnel depends on the project's size and complexity. When it comes to data migration, involving both before and after images, the entire process usually extends to six or seven months.

The price of the solution is not very expensive. However, the issue lies in the ongoing maintenance charges, which can be quite high and burdensome.

These days in Korea, discussions often revolve around cloud services, with a focus on technologies like Hadoop and MongoDB, also there's a new Oracle service, that is related to handling large datasets. The challenge is that not many people are aware of this Oracle service, and this lack of knowledge is seen as a limitation compared to technologies like Hadoop. Hadoop can extend across multiple servers, which allows for clustering and scaling. Oracle, on the other hand, traditionally operates on a single server without easy expansion to multiple servers. However, Oracle introduced a solution to address this limitation a couple of years ago, but it seems that it hasn't gained widespread recognition yet.

Overall, I would rate it ten out of ten.

We primarily use the solution as a database to help with the management of hospitals, AMI centers, etc.

The database is the solution's most valuable feature.

The solution overall is very, very good. It's got good integration with other databases and adds new features often.

The solution uses Flash technology for Enterprise Manager but in version 19 is uses SDM 05. It's difficult to transfer from the previous version to the newest. They don't have adjacent types of data.

Since we're in Iran, we don't have access to documentation, so all of the learning we do is with the solution itself. We only can look at the surface.

The solution should offer memory management.

I used the solution up until three months ago.

The solution is scalable. We use Oracle for 2 up to 100 servers.

We used to use Behavior Master for checking queries and now we use Oracle for this. It's provided an improved performance.

The solution is simple to set up. It's not difficult to deploy.

On Oracle, you can install the Linux platform and you can install the console on a blank terminal. It's a really good feature. I installed it and started from a blank terminal. It's simple.

I installed the solution myself.

We use the private cloud deployment model.

The solution is good for organizations that have very heavy data. We use auto-indexing for comments and are able to check queries and make an index for them.

I'd rate the solution ten out of ten.

We primarily use the solution for publishing. We use tickets to monitor for alerts to understand which host is down or has poor performance.

In Oracle MySQL they have an autonomous database now. Once we get it up and running, the best part is that it scales the application and helps automatically deal with issues that come in.

Integrating business intelligence or NLP solutions would help us save time and would prevent us from having to take a deep dive. Data problems seem to multiply on the system when you interact with it. Automation would save a lot of man-hours.

I've been using the solution for three to five years.

The solution is stable. Normally the dev space plays an important role in how we shape the environment.

We deployed it in the OC environment.

Oracle normally looks at two types of scalability. One is vertical and the other is horizontal. Oracle right now doesn't try to vertically scale the database unless and until it's required to add OTT or RAM. However, it does take care of the eventual scaling wherein it makes sure the connectors are in line and there are multiple servers in the cluster starting line. 

A good scaling job provides convenience and reliability. It also makes sure that there are different data centers across the globe. You need at least four or five data centers, based on the speed of the application. Whatever the nearest location is, they'll keep trying to go there, to get the data the right way. 

The dev-ops team does a great deal of getting it in line, to make sure we get data in a seamless way. Of course, our cluster has been done so horizontal scaling. This type of scaling is what we focus on.

In the trial we conducted, we had 1,182 people on the solution without facing any problems.

The solution increases logarithmically via batches we direct on a weekly basis.

We're very happy with technical support. They have incorporated a chatbot, and if the issue is out of reach of the chatbot, it automatically directs you to an agent. The solution is also very good when it comes to handling SLAs.

The initial setup was straightforward.

The initial deployment was on the dev side. We staged it off the cloud and then moved onto it. It took us around a week to deploy everything. Then we had all the dev-ops integrated into Oracle. With everything included, it took us some time to replicate it all and have it ready to go.

We handled the implementation ourselves. We have all the tools and partially use open source solutions to streamline the data and integrate everything.

We use the private cloud deployment model.

If a company is looking for an autonomous database, which is one of this solution's unique features compared, this is a good option. They won't have to worry much about data issues or getting a database or scaling, etc. 

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

We collect data from end-users and store the data using the Oracle MySQL Cloud Service.

The most valuable feature is the data aggregation function.

The technical support is in need of improvement.

It is difficult to do any coding with this solution.

We have been using this solution for the past couple of years.

The Oracle MySQL Cloud Service is stable.

This solution is scalable enough. We haven't seen any problems with it.

We have about 60 users within my project.

The technical support from Oracle needs to be improved.

We performed a cluster-based setup that needs some configuration, so I would say that the initial setup is complex.

We compared Oracle to other competing databases and found advantages with this solution. Beyond that, we haven't tried working with any similar tools.

My advice to anybody who is researching this solution is that it is a better option than other solutions. 

I would rate this solution a six out of ten.

Having multiple reliable databases has improved our business greatly because having a robust database is so integral to the company in general.

The support is not that great. They're not really supporting directly anymore and relying on experts to figure out technical issues. Oracle does offer a website where you can open a service request, etc., however, general technical support could be improved.

The solution is, without a doubt, very stable. 

The scalability of the database is absolutely guaranteed by the new features. We have 20-30,000 users on the solution right now.

Technical support is lacking in general.

As a global company, we have all types of business needs, and all types of cloud and on-premises solutions. We chose Oracle MySQL because it was the best option, and still is.

The initial setup was very easy.

Implementation was handled by our internal team.

The solution is very expensive. Of course, you pay for what you get. So there is a reason why those products are very expensive compared with the other products. You are paying for some very good features.

We use a hybrid version of the solution.

I would recommend Oracle MySQL.

I would rate the solution seven out of ten. I would rate it higher if support was better.

I use MySQL for the database, to store data on my web application

The solution overall is very powerful.

Sometimes MySQL does upgrades on the server. When we are still using the old server and when they integrate the upgrade, they don't carry along some of the old syntaxes. The versions don't sync.

The stability of the solution is very good. I wouldn't have used it for the past seven years if I was not satisfied.

The solution is very scalable.

We've never used the solution's enterprise support. We can get support from the MySQL communities, so we've never needed to contact technical support.

Previously, we used Node.js. It's a document-oriented database. Complexity-wise, there was a chance it could fail, which is why we ultimately switched.

The initial setup is very straightforward.

The simplicity of the solution is very good. It's a straightforward solution and makes for a very good cloud option.

I would rate the solution nine out of ten.