A well-known issue for a lot of different users is associated with write-intensive applications. There are so many write-intensive applications. Usually, the applications are designed as read-intensive ones, where the number of reads is way more than the write operations. I would say MariaDB or any other relational database is designed by default to be for read-intensive applications. There are a lot of features being added to the tool, such as something called Galera Cluster, which supports write-intensive applications and sharding. People have to come up with their own way to share their applications, and that is the only way they can come up with a better performance tool for write-intensive applications.
While MariaDB is a good relational database, it can be inflexible for complex use cases. It doesn't adapt well to changing needs and lacks features like time series data support, which requires us to use ServiceNow's Clotho DB. In short, MariaDB's strength lies in its core functionality but it is not suitable for all situations. While MariaDB itself doesn't offer built-in analytics tools, ServiceNow provides Stats Now for internal data visualization. This tool integrates with other analytics platforms like Splunk or Grafana, all pulling data from the same central source. MariaDB likely avoids including its own analytics due to these existing solutions within ServiceNow.
Senior Technical Manager at Johnson Controls, Inc.
Real User
Top 10
2024-05-03T13:42:57Z
May 3, 2024
We are facing some deadlock issues when the nodes get rebooted. There is not much support available. The support must be improved. The downtime is more. It takes us time to restore production. There must be less downtime during outages.
Associate, Software Developer (Appian) at The European Bank for Reconstruction and Development
Real User
Top 10
2023-11-29T15:23:51Z
Nov 29, 2023
Document caching is an area of concern in the product, where improvements are required to help MariaDB improve on the previous queries as they are retained, and you can roll back to them.
In MariaDB, three aspects can be enhanced, starting with the indexes. Currently, the indexes are not as strong. The second area is related to exclusion queries, subqueries, or joins. There's one join that isn't fully supported, the product I came across about MariaDB. Customer support can also be improved.
My company hasn't seen any problems with the solution where it has been running. The solution works fine for the purpose it is meant for, so there are no issues. MariaDB should provide HA and archive logging. If HA and archive logging are present in the solution, it is hard to find them. The aforementioned details related to HA and archive logging need to be considered for improvement. I haven't had the opportunity to use the features provided by the solution since I don't know how to see them.
System Engineer at a financial services firm with 1,001-5,000 employees
Real User
Top 5
2023-08-10T08:40:34Z
Aug 10, 2023
I'm interested in witnessing the integration of materialized views, which would enable the preservation of select queries. This particular functionality seems to be absent in MariaDB when compared to rival relational databases such as Oracle and SQL Server. The inclusion of this feature, akin to the offering from PostgreSQL, would be a valuable addition to MariaDB's capabilities.
MariaDB is everything that SQL DB has, but it's much lighter and more flexible. It's also more expandable. So I don't think MariaDB has any disadvantages compared to SQL DB. So the only issue is that it's not as lightweight as SQL DB. That's probably the only drawback. In future releases, mainly the addition of security features would be beneficial for MariaDB. It would be great to have built-in capabilities that can be managed through plug-ins and system administration. This would require incorporating security measures into the code, which is a one-time activity but needs to be maintained. Wrappers can also be written for reusability and improved security. That's something MariaDB could benefit from.
It doesn't have the same level of maturity metrics as Postgres. For example, if you look at the architecture of Postgres, it has an architecture similar to Oracle, a robust and widely practiced architecture. In terms of multi-database support, both Postgres and MySQL have the same objective. Every software, including MariaDB, has its own advantages and features tailored to customer needs. In my opinion, it's a very good solution. I don't have any points to criticize it as a database. We prioritize the needs of our customers and choose from various options accordingly. For instance, MariaDB or MySQL could be suitable options depending on the specific requirements of the project. In the future release, better management of tablespaces would be beneficial. Currently, it's a bit lacking in that area. Additionally, more efficient space utilization could be improved.
An improvement would be scaling it up to the levels of Oracle, especially when it comes to resilience, so that we can do higher transactions for two databases or power our operation. When it comes to higher availability, that's where it gets more complicated. I think the system needs to be more mature, especially for enterprises. They could improve the replication rate. I know the connection pool goes up to 20,000 connections. It should be more accessible. The interface and integration could also be improved.
Operations Manager Uganda at a tech services company with 201-500 employees
Reseller
Top 5
2022-07-27T14:20:15Z
Jul 27, 2022
The PL/SQL performance is slow. If you have big batch jobs running in the middle of the night for a bank doing its end-of-day audits, then MariaDB will take three times longer than using Oracle. The product lacks sufficient detail in its reports. MariaDB has many extra features that would help to optimize the DB in the enterprise version and it would be helpful if it were possible to add some of those features in the open source version.
MariaDB can improve by adding more features. There are a lot of features, which are available in Oracle, and which are not available in MariaDB. We hope they will introduce the features soon. In a future release, MariaDB should add more collections. We want parallel processing.
The solution should do some fine-tuning on maybe the transaction per second so that users can get more than they can on the Microsoft SQL Server. If you want to gain more transactions at MariaDB over the Microsoft SQL Server, you have to do lots of fine-tuning and combine a lot of parameters to get more transactions per second over the Microsoft SQL Server or another database. I reach the limits of MySQL at 15,000 transactions per second. MariaDB should aim to be better. They should have more integrations with BI tools.
Replication could be better, and it's not so simple. It would be better if they had a replication server. It would make things a lot easier. You need to have that replication server, but not in the same server farm. Then there will be a bit of latency between both because you should have one in one city and another one in a different city. That kind of solution should be more baked into every single database today. Mirroring the database in a live environment where any record written on the production server replicates instantly across the fiber on the other server wasn't easy. Many people don't even bother with that, and they just run one server.
The technical support could be better. It's hard to connect with them as they are not based locally. The product needs more features and more functionality. It's imperative that it supports more platforms, and supports more operating systems. If MariaDB becomes more popular, then they will find more people will use the DB for more applications and projects. It would be ideal if they offered some sort of easy migration tool for migrating from older MariaDB products.
Senior Database Administrator Engineer at a comms service provider with 10,001+ employees
Real User
2021-03-12T06:19:24Z
Mar 12, 2021
The solution offers very good automatic features. The GUI could be improved a bit. The user interface needs to be improved. I haven't tested the latest version of the solution. There may have been updated and changes that I am not aware of. The stability of the solution could be improved, as we've had issues. It would be ideal if the solution could offer an active-active cluster.
I'd like to see more time series data and additional partitioning support, natively is possible. I started using it on MariaDB but then migrated one of my systems to PostgreSQL because they have good support for time series data, plus there's a plug-in that PostgreSQL supports and it's easy to use. MariaDB could have something like that which would provide better support for times series data. I'd also like to see automatic partitioning, because at some point I experienced issues with database performance. It's complex and we do everything in-house, so if there was better support for table partitioning, that would be great. I'd like to see something that does automatic optimization or tuning, particularly for new users, and depending on the system that the database management system is installed. Along with improved plug-in for native hyper-table support, both these things would be greatly helpful.
It would be good if they can maybe improve the mass import in the database. Currently, for importing a large number of data, we create a CSV file and upload all the things in the system. The system does not activate them by default. We have to do this manually. This may be due to the version we are using, but this is something we would like to see improved.
Scalability is an area that needs to be improved. When we have had issues with accidental computer shutdown or a power outage, our MariaDB database was corrupted. This did not happen with our Oracle or Microsoft SQL Server, so I think that there might be some differences in the database engine that better deals with these kinds of accidents.
With respect to clustering and the master-slave configuration, sometimes the slave goes out of synch. If one server goes down then the other server in the cluster should be able to handle the load. If the synchronization were better and it was easier to maintain the cluster then that would be an improvement.
Associate Vice President - Infra and Managed Hosting at a tech services company with 1,001-5,000 employees
Real User
2020-06-15T07:34:02Z
Jun 15, 2020
The scaling for database online transactions needs improvement. Our users now are restoring the data. They should explore the performance of online transactions.
I would like to see more compatibility going forward. This would help if there is a need to change databases. E.g., if I change from MySQL 5.7 to another database, then MySQL could be the master database and this could database could be the slave. The replication capability is very important.
Head of IT Planning and Development Division at BRILife
Real User
2020-04-30T10:58:57Z
Apr 30, 2020
It would be helpful if I could specify multiple drives for the database storage. That is not supported by MariaDB. For example, in Microsoft SQL Server, you can have storage on multiple drives.
Performance with databases is always the same, we always want more. Stability needs to be improved. If you are creating a class test, modern machinery or working with the databases, it's always a little bit difficult to configure and keep everything working. The addition of a workbench for managing this solution would be an improvement. Also, some kind of technical support to help in getting better performance.
Senior Manager Global Database Services at Aptiv PLC
Vendor
2019-12-09T10:58:00Z
Dec 9, 2019
MariaDB has to improve from a management perspective. There is not much available for querying internal views to provide information for the operations team. Most other databases such as Microsoft SQL Server, Oracle, or even PostgreSQL, have a big set of internal views that you can query to understand what is going on, if anything is wrong, or how to improve.
Some areas where this product could be improved are in the clustering technologies, redundancy, active-active deployment model, and also monitoring the backup and restore solution to the cloud. They have made some enhancements on the product but I think that scalability and redundancies are a concern for the entire team. In the next release, I would like to see improvements in the scalability and redundancy features.
IT Specialist Databases at Botswana Open University
Real User
2019-07-31T05:52:00Z
Jul 31, 2019
The interface should be more user-friendly. It should be able to connect directly to the database and Interact with it without having to use commands. It needs better integration. In future releases, it would be helpful if they could create an administration portal for the database to help manage it.
MariaDB is an open source relational database created by the original founders of MySQL. It is considered one of the most popular and trusted database servers throughout the world. MariaDB is a valued component found in most cloud offerings and is the default in many Linux tools. It is also widely used by Wikipedia, WordPress, and Google, among other well-known sites. Maria DB easily melds data into concise information from a vast array of applications, such as banking, online shopping,...
The only potential area for improvement could be the pricing model, which might benefit from being more flexible or a bit cheaper.
A well-known issue for a lot of different users is associated with write-intensive applications. There are so many write-intensive applications. Usually, the applications are designed as read-intensive ones, where the number of reads is way more than the write operations. I would say MariaDB or any other relational database is designed by default to be for read-intensive applications. There are a lot of features being added to the tool, such as something called Galera Cluster, which supports write-intensive applications and sharding. People have to come up with their own way to share their applications, and that is the only way they can come up with a better performance tool for write-intensive applications.
While MariaDB is a good relational database, it can be inflexible for complex use cases. It doesn't adapt well to changing needs and lacks features like time series data support, which requires us to use ServiceNow's Clotho DB. In short, MariaDB's strength lies in its core functionality but it is not suitable for all situations. While MariaDB itself doesn't offer built-in analytics tools, ServiceNow provides Stats Now for internal data visualization. This tool integrates with other analytics platforms like Splunk or Grafana, all pulling data from the same central source. MariaDB likely avoids including its own analytics due to these existing solutions within ServiceNow.
There could be a command-line prompt for repairing the database and fixing indexes, similar to what was available in the old MyISAM storage engine.
Concurrency is a challenge in MariaDB.
We are facing some deadlock issues when the nodes get rebooted. There is not much support available. The support must be improved. The downtime is more. It takes us time to restore production. There must be less downtime during outages.
There is the need for a robust IDE for MongoDB. The existing PHP admin console doesn't meet the client's requirements effectively.
Document caching is an area of concern in the product, where improvements are required to help MariaDB improve on the previous queries as they are retained, and you can roll back to them.
In MariaDB, three aspects can be enhanced, starting with the indexes. Currently, the indexes are not as strong. The second area is related to exclusion queries, subqueries, or joins. There's one join that isn't fully supported, the product I came across about MariaDB. Customer support can also be improved.
The configuration could be improved. It should be easier.
My company hasn't seen any problems with the solution where it has been running. The solution works fine for the purpose it is meant for, so there are no issues. MariaDB should provide HA and archive logging. If HA and archive logging are present in the solution, it is hard to find them. The aforementioned details related to HA and archive logging need to be considered for improvement. I haven't had the opportunity to use the features provided by the solution since I don't know how to see them.
I'm interested in witnessing the integration of materialized views, which would enable the preservation of select queries. This particular functionality seems to be absent in MariaDB when compared to rival relational databases such as Oracle and SQL Server. The inclusion of this feature, akin to the offering from PostgreSQL, would be a valuable addition to MariaDB's capabilities.
It should work across all fields like SQLite, as it is the basis of any application, even apps for phones and the like.
MariaDB is everything that SQL DB has, but it's much lighter and more flexible. It's also more expandable. So I don't think MariaDB has any disadvantages compared to SQL DB. So the only issue is that it's not as lightweight as SQL DB. That's probably the only drawback. In future releases, mainly the addition of security features would be beneficial for MariaDB. It would be great to have built-in capabilities that can be managed through plug-ins and system administration. This would require incorporating security measures into the code, which is a one-time activity but needs to be maintained. Wrappers can also be written for reusability and improved security. That's something MariaDB could benefit from.
It doesn't have the same level of maturity metrics as Postgres. For example, if you look at the architecture of Postgres, it has an architecture similar to Oracle, a robust and widely practiced architecture. In terms of multi-database support, both Postgres and MySQL have the same objective. Every software, including MariaDB, has its own advantages and features tailored to customer needs. In my opinion, it's a very good solution. I don't have any points to criticize it as a database. We prioritize the needs of our customers and choose from various options accordingly. For instance, MariaDB or MySQL could be suitable options depending on the specific requirements of the project. In the future release, better management of tablespaces would be beneficial. Currently, it's a bit lacking in that area. Additionally, more efficient space utilization could be improved.
There is room for improvement in terms of security.
The dashboard and pricing need improvement.
An improvement would be scaling it up to the levels of Oracle, especially when it comes to resilience, so that we can do higher transactions for two databases or power our operation. When it comes to higher availability, that's where it gets more complicated. I think the system needs to be more mature, especially for enterprises. They could improve the replication rate. I know the connection pool goes up to 20,000 connections. It should be more accessible. The interface and integration could also be improved.
MariaDB could improve by adding support for non-relational structures and new data types.
The PL/SQL performance is slow. If you have big batch jobs running in the middle of the night for a bank doing its end-of-day audits, then MariaDB will take three times longer than using Oracle. The product lacks sufficient detail in its reports. MariaDB has many extra features that would help to optimize the DB in the enterprise version and it would be helpful if it were possible to add some of those features in the open source version.
The price could be less expensive.
MariaDB can improve by adding more features. There are a lot of features, which are available in Oracle, and which are not available in MariaDB. We hope they will introduce the features soon. In a future release, MariaDB should add more collections. We want parallel processing.
The solution can improve by having support for more integration. However, at this time it is working well for us.
The solution should do some fine-tuning on maybe the transaction per second so that users can get more than they can on the Microsoft SQL Server. If you want to gain more transactions at MariaDB over the Microsoft SQL Server, you have to do lots of fine-tuning and combine a lot of parameters to get more transactions per second over the Microsoft SQL Server or another database. I reach the limits of MySQL at 15,000 transactions per second. MariaDB should aim to be better. They should have more integrations with BI tools.
MariaDB could be improved by adding more automation.
The stability could always continue to be improved upon.
MariaDB doesn't handle long or complex SQL queries quite as well as Oracle Database.
Replication could be better, and it's not so simple. It would be better if they had a replication server. It would make things a lot easier. You need to have that replication server, but not in the same server farm. Then there will be a bit of latency between both because you should have one in one city and another one in a different city. That kind of solution should be more baked into every single database today. Mirroring the database in a live environment where any record written on the production server replicates instantly across the fiber on the other server wasn't easy. Many people don't even bother with that, and they just run one server.
The technical support could be better. It's hard to connect with them as they are not based locally. The product needs more features and more functionality. It's imperative that it supports more platforms, and supports more operating systems. If MariaDB becomes more popular, then they will find more people will use the DB for more applications and projects. It would be ideal if they offered some sort of easy migration tool for migrating from older MariaDB products.
It would be good to have tools for debugging procedures and functions.
The solution offers very good automatic features. The GUI could be improved a bit. The user interface needs to be improved. I haven't tested the latest version of the solution. There may have been updated and changes that I am not aware of. The stability of the solution could be improved, as we've had issues. It would be ideal if the solution could offer an active-active cluster.
I'd like to see more time series data and additional partitioning support, natively is possible. I started using it on MariaDB but then migrated one of my systems to PostgreSQL because they have good support for time series data, plus there's a plug-in that PostgreSQL supports and it's easy to use. MariaDB could have something like that which would provide better support for times series data. I'd also like to see automatic partitioning, because at some point I experienced issues with database performance. It's complex and we do everything in-house, so if there was better support for table partitioning, that would be great. I'd like to see something that does automatic optimization or tuning, particularly for new users, and depending on the system that the database management system is installed. Along with improved plug-in for native hyper-table support, both these things would be greatly helpful.
It would be good if they can maybe improve the mass import in the database. Currently, for importing a large number of data, we create a CSV file and upload all the things in the system. The system does not activate them by default. We have to do this manually. This may be due to the version we are using, but this is something we would like to see improved.
Scalability is an area that needs to be improved. When we have had issues with accidental computer shutdown or a power outage, our MariaDB database was corrupted. This did not happen with our Oracle or Microsoft SQL Server, so I think that there might be some differences in the database engine that better deals with these kinds of accidents.
With respect to clustering and the master-slave configuration, sometimes the slave goes out of synch. If one server goes down then the other server in the cluster should be able to handle the load. If the synchronization were better and it was easier to maintain the cluster then that would be an improvement.
Master-master replication is something that needs to be simplified. I would like to see support for deploying MariaDB as an embedded database.
The scaling for database online transactions needs improvement. Our users now are restoring the data. They should explore the performance of online transactions.
I would like to see more compatibility going forward. This would help if there is a need to change databases. E.g., if I change from MySQL 5.7 to another database, then MySQL could be the master database and this could database could be the slave. The replication capability is very important.
It would be helpful if I could specify multiple drives for the database storage. That is not supported by MariaDB. For example, in Microsoft SQL Server, you can have storage on multiple drives.
Performance with databases is always the same, we always want more. Stability needs to be improved. If you are creating a class test, modern machinery or working with the databases, it's always a little bit difficult to configure and keep everything working. The addition of a workbench for managing this solution would be an improvement. Also, some kind of technical support to help in getting better performance.
MariaDB has to improve from a management perspective. There is not much available for querying internal views to provide information for the operations team. Most other databases such as Microsoft SQL Server, Oracle, or even PostgreSQL, have a big set of internal views that you can query to understand what is going on, if anything is wrong, or how to improve.
Some areas where this product could be improved are in the clustering technologies, redundancy, active-active deployment model, and also monitoring the backup and restore solution to the cloud. They have made some enhancements on the product but I think that scalability and redundancies are a concern for the entire team. In the next release, I would like to see improvements in the scalability and redundancy features.
The interface should be more user-friendly. It should be able to connect directly to the database and Interact with it without having to use commands. It needs better integration. In future releases, it would be helpful if they could create an administration portal for the database to help manage it.