MySQL Reviews

I like MySQL because of its community.

MySQL doesn't have the auto-clustering and database clustering features that other competitors provide. They can include these features.

I have been using MySQL for about two years. 

It is stable.

It is really easy to scale. We have around 20 to 40 users who use it regularly.

I never interacted with their technical support. If there is any problem in my project, I just look for it on Stack Overflow and fix it easily. It also comes with good documentation.

It is easy to install. The deployment duration depends upon your internet connection. If you have a good internet connection, the deployment would be faster.

I would recommend this product if someone is new to the IT world.

I would rate MySQL an eight out of ten.

Private Cloud

Other

Web portal database.

• Free usage
• Performance
• Community

Scaling.

More than five years.

There have been some problems with big table operations.

Some problems with big table operations, and a struggle to keep the servers responding in peak situations.

I don't have enough information about it, as I normally look for community support.

Straightforward, and and easy to run.

Can range from free to quite expensive, depending on the environments and requirements, so better to really set goals ahead of setting it up.

SQL Server, Oracle XE, MariaDB.

It is a stable, reliable, and powerful solution that is quite suited for small to medium organizations and/or projects.

Easy:

• Installation
• Customization
• Use

Data is:

• More ordered
• Reliable
• Available in time and form

Scalability: In large databases, they become slow.

12 years.

No.

Yes. In large databases, response times are high.

10 out of 10.

We used this solution, but changed for another because the database was very large.

Configuration was easy and with much support material.

No.

Let them think about the size of the database.

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 ().

We use this solution for billing, accounting, and data analysis.

The most valuable feature is the ease of use.

The manuals or documentation could be better.

I have been using MySQL for ten years.

We are using version 8.

We do not have any issues with the stability of MySQL.

For our needs, it's sufficient.

We have 10 users in our organization.

It has more than enough support available for our needs. There is plenty of support from the community.

We rely on the forums and other channels for help. It's pretty good at the moment.

The initial setup is straightforward.

The installation can take approximately an hour.

You need to be aware of databases to make use of it. You need a moderate level of competence.

We use the community edition.

There is no cost involved, no licensing fees.

We did not evaluate other products.

It's a good product for new startups.

I would rate MySQL a seven out of ten.

On-premises

I use MySQL for employee service in an OLTP database.

I use MySQL for various purposes. Sometimes I have used MyISAM as a storage engine rather than InnoDB.

When working with a cluster wide, I have to use the MySQL cluster version.

One to three years.

The 5.7 version has very better performance improvement over the previous version.

• Compatibility
• Stability
• Maintenance

These are very important points to keep in mind while deploying consumer facing products, it has to work.

It’s been used as the main databases for a lot of the developments we have done.

As for special features it offers, I wouldn’t say there’s a key one, but I do appreciate the stability it has.

• Real-time
• Event driven results
• Geolocation data
• Non-text storage

Over five years now.

No, I’d say this is the best.

It’s not easy to scale horizontally, don’t think it was ever meant for it. Lacks ease of installation and continuous usage.

Not applicable.

No, in fact, I switched away from it in new developments.

It’s very straightforward, really easy to install. Configuration is easy to understand and to change.

Since Oracle bought MySQL, I’ve seen a slow development. I would recommend the community server if you have to have MySQL, but I wouldn’t license or purchase it.

PostgreSQL.

This product’s most valuable feature to me is active-active (multi-master) cluster support for MySQL.

We have been using the multi-master solution from the Percona cluster. It seems to work as expected.

We use it as an embedded component of a solution we sell. It has provided a low-cost, high-availability solution without complex active/standby management using Linux HA.

It should provide detailed debugging with transaction IDs at the application level to understand deadlocks, especially under bursty workloads.

It should also provide partitioned tables and a clustered index, like Oracle, to take advantage of inherent parallelisms in the application domain.

It does not scale well when there are concurrent requests. Making changes to binlog and transaction log settings improves scalability at the cost of reliability.

It has decent support.

This product’s active-active cluster feature was the reason for choosing it.

One of the reasons PostgreSQL was not considered – a decision taken before I joined the company - was its lack of mature multi-master cluster support. It also lacked other popular ports (e.g. MariaDB, Percona, etc. in MySQL).

Ensure that it meets your scaling needs, and has features for handling parallelism in the application.