MySQL Reviews

We use MySQL for OLTP applications. HeatWave is used more on the SnowFlake and DSS side of the application.

Compared to other databases, MySQL is cheaper and we used the community edition which was free of cost. ML is fully integrated with the database in HeatWave. It also has many other features. MySQL is a far better solution in terms of pricing.

I would like to see more integrations of the solution with other platforms and improve the support on different data types.

I have been using the solution for more than 12 years. I am using the solution’s latest version.

I would rate the stability around seven to eight. They should improve the stability.

I would give a rating of eight out of ten for the solution’s scalability. We have a large user base for the solution which is more than 30.

MySQL is easy to set up if you have the PaaS service on your cloud infrastructure. If the setup is normal, then the overall deployment process is easier. However, if there is a need for clustering, then we will need an SME and assets.

You need to install an RPM on-premises to get the database. We need to tweak some parameters at the InnoDB. We have to create the cloud service on the Oracle cloud infrastructure.

The solution’s pricing depends on customer requirements. A license is not required for the community edition.

I would rate the overall solution an eight out of ten. However, compared to other open-source databases like PostgreSQL, I would rate it a nine out of ten. Compared to Oracle, I can give a rating of around seven to eight. We are using MySQL’s HeatWave. The maintenance of the solution is based on its complexity. In the normal scenario, one resource is good enough for maintenance and deployment. The older versions had an issue with stability. The issue has improved with the newer versions.

Our primary use case for MySQL is for our internally-built system. When our developers are doing the assistance, usually we provision them with the MySQL driver.

The way that MySQL has improved my organization is that it comes free and also works fine on the technical side.

The feature I found most valuable was the cluster setup.

The integration with other systems can be improved as can the integration between other databases. We have a workaround to integrate it with other systems but that can be improved.

In the next release, I would like to see better day-to-day support in case we face any issues.

I have been using MySQL since 2008.

I would rate the stability of this solution an eight, on a scale from one to 10, with one being the worst and 10 being the best. We have a team of three DBAs supporting and maintaining this product.

I would rate the scalability of this solution an eight, on a scale from one to 10, with one being the worst and 10 being the best. I believe MySQL very scalable.

I would rate the technical support an eight, on a scale from one to 10, with one being the worst and 10 being the best.

Positive

I would rate the initial setup process a nine, on a scale from one to 10, with one being the worst and 10 being the best. I would say that this process has been quite easy.

The deployment of this solution was done by an in-house team and it took around 30 minutes to one hour.

I would rate the pricing of this solution a two, on a scale from one to 10, with one being not expensive and 10 being very expensive.

I would recommend this solution to other people.

Overall, I would rate MySQL solution a nine, on a scale from one to 10, with one being the worst and 10 being the best.

I like the simplistic view of MySQL to build custom queries and things like that as compared to SQL Server, which seems more cluttered.

SQL Server has a query analyzer. MySQL pretty much does the same, and performance-wise, it has less overhead for connecting to our ERP system. It seems more responsive and cleaner. With MySQL, you get what you need without any overbloating, for which Microsoft is known. That's why they have so many constant security patches for everything because there is so much stuff, which degrades performance.

The GUI interface probably can be improved. Let us say I want to see the relationships in the database. In the query analyzer, I would like to go and drop the tables and create relationships between the tables. I haven't found a feature like that in MySQL. It was a shortcoming even in SQL Server.

MySQL can have more performance monitoring tools. I know Google has these tools, but within MySQL, there are not that many tools to monitor things like performance and database locking. They might be in there, and I might not be familiar enough to know where they are. I am a pretty new user of MySQL.

I have been using MySQL for three months.

It has very good stability. We haven't had any issues with it.

It has good scalability. You can use the Google interface to build it on the cloud. If you start noticing performance issues or you see it taking up memory or resources, you can add another processor. It is pretty easy to do. Right now, we are in beta. We haven't rolled it out completely to the people.

I haven't had to use their technical support. They have plenty of online resources. If you have any problem, you can just search for it and find the answer. Somewhere, someone has done it before.

The ERP company that we work with is moving away from SQL to MySQL. From my understanding, it is because of the cost. MySQL is also more streamlined and gives them what they need. 

Even though I am a SQL Server person, MySQL has come a long way from what it used to be. They have made great strides. It seems like Google is moving more and more to it. In Google Data Studio, which gives you an interface to build dashboards, when you try and connect to new resources, you will notice they prefer MySQL on the cloud or a private server. Google is leaning more towards the MySQL side of things, and they make it very easy. It is a lot more work trying to connect to SQL Server. MySQL seems to be the preferred cloud database that people are going for.

The initial setup was straightforward. MYSQL installation has fewer options than a SQL Server installation, which has endless options. MySQL installation is more straightforward and streamlined. It doesn't have a lot of extra features. It is just a database. It is a database engine that gives you what you need, and I like it.

I am doing one installation right now on Google Cloud. I am building an instance of MySQL. It is just more simplistic. It is more to the point and what you need. In SQL Server, you need to dive into the endless options, and you use maybe 60% of what is there. There is a lot of stuff that people don't use, which you end up uninstalling because it affects the server performance, and it is a service that you are not even using. There is a full install as well as a custom install with SQL Server. If you go for the full install, it throws everything into the server, and you start noticing performance issues. Then you realize that there are services that you are not even using. Some places don't even use analytics or reporting services.

Microsoft licensing for SQL Server is probably ten times more expensive. I used to work for the government, and I remember when we were looking into upgrading to the enterprise version of SQL Server 2019, the licensing was going to cost 350,000. To get the equivalent in the cloud, it was going to be about four grand to get the same processing power and everything else. With MySQL, it was going to be about 300 for the same licensing. 

Cost-wise, for sure, there is a huge difference. Would you prefer to pay 300 a month or 3,000 to have the same amount of data resources? You might lose a few options that you need, but it isn't worth the price difference.

If you want just a database for data storage, I would recommend MySQL. If you want something that has everything in it, such as reporting services and analytics, SQL Server might be better. Cost-wise, MySQL is almost pricing itself out.

I would rate MySQL an eight out of ten for ease of use, especially for someone who has never used it and implemented it. It was pretty straightforward to implement it. It gives you what you need. It surely provides the basics such as data storage, setting up the tables, etc.

MySQL is an open-source relational database management system used to store data.

MySQL is an easy-to-use solution that provides stability, reliability, flexibility, performance, security, and high availability.

MySQL could introduce more indexing strategies. There are a couple of strategies where you can index things to be more searchable and visible. We lack that kind of functionality. For example, if your name is indexed correctly with a certain strategy, it can improve the search results faster. The solution’s interface could be improved.

I have been using MySQL for my entire career.

MySQL is a stable solution.

MySQL is a scalable solution.

The solution’s initial setup is easy.

MySQL is a free and open-source solution.

MySQL is deployed on the cloud in our organization. Big companies like Netflix, Uber, and Facebook use the solution. Since MySQL is an old product, many people might have faced similar issues, posted them online, and got a resolution. MySQL's performance and scalability features have supported our database growth.

New users can follow the documentation to use the solution, as it is straightforward. You need to be very clear about why you want to use the solution. MySQL is a relational database management system that cannot be used as a dynamic database management system.

MySQL is generally faster and more efficient than other relational database management systems. Hence, it is our preferred choice for applications that require high performance.

Overall, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

I would use MySQL for a medium project, with around 1,00,000 hundred thousand users, because of the indexing and stored procedures.

MySQL's performance needs to be improved for enterprise-level applications compared to Oracle and Postgres. That's the only drawback I found in MySQL. When the table storage is full, the solution's performance becomes slow. The solution's security needs improvement as DB2 is more secure than MySQL.

I have been using MySQL for more than ten years.

MySQL has good stability.

I rate the solution a six or seven out of ten for stability.

Around 150 users are using the solution daily in our organization.

I rate the solution a six out of ten for scalability.

We previously used Oracle. We switched to MySQL because Oracle's license was costly.

It's really easy to set up MySQL. On a scale from one to ten, where one is difficult and ten is easy, I rate the solution's initial setup an eight out of ten.

We implemented the solution in our organization through a consultant. It took a few hours to set up everything. Around one to two people were needed to deploy the solution.

MySQL is a cheap solution.

When you compare Oracle and DB2 with SQL Server and MySQL, all these come under RDBMS (Relational Database Management System). Since the licensing for Oracle and DB2 is costly, people will go for either MySQL or Postgres. People go for MySQL because it is better than Postgres in indexing and supports multiple data types compared to Postgres.

Just one person is needed to maintain MySQL. We didn't face any challenges using MySQL because of many open communities. If you have MySQL's commercial license, you will get good support. I would recommend MySQL to users who are going for medium enterprise applications.

Overall, I rate the solution a seven out of ten.

MySQL is easy and convenient for me. I don't need to rely on anyone. I can write the code and extract the information. It is fast if you know how to use it. The solution is not expensive, and most of the developers know how to use it. It is easy to create tables. The solution is stable and has good performance. The connection with AWS gives regular updates, which is manual otherwise and a nightmare. 

The tool needs to improve table visualization.

I have been using the solution for three years. 

MySQL is stable and fast. 

The tool is scalable. Around 15-20 developers use the tool in my company. 

MySQL's technical support is good. 

The tool's installation is easy. You must download the app and log in using a password and username. 

I rate the product a ten out of ten. 

Our company uses the solution to extract data from databases. We perform the create, read, write, and operations in databases.  

The number of users depends on the project. If there is a demand, then people good with SQL will jump in on projects. 

The solution helps us perform with our databases and extract data. 

The solution is free. 

Clusters are hard to perform so we use no SQL alternates like MongoDB. 

The solution should manage large data sets better because data that is around one lakh or two lakh fails to load. In these cases, we use no SQL structures like MongoDB. 

I have been using the solution for three years. 

The solution is stable. 

The solution is decently, but not largely scalable. It works very well and is comfortable with 50K or 60K of data. If you have large-scale data, then the solution is slower and has some errors. 

I have not needed technical support. 

The setup is pretty easy. All resources are available on YouTube so configuration is quite easy. 

We implemented the solution in-house and setup was pretty fast. You just set up the application, create queries, and connect with the front end or whatever you are trying to do. 

If you are handling large data, then it is a good idea to maintain the solution weekly because it will be better. 

The solution is open source so is free. 

The solution is good for smaller data or new users. If you are maintaining large data and want to build a fully-furnished application, then you have to use something else like PostgreSQL. 

If you are new to database management, then the solution will be the best choice. 

I rate the solution an eight out of ten. 

I used it for a small customer database company in England with 20 employees. They didn't have that much data, and we needed something easy to install and easy to run. This was my use case for it.

My main reason for using MySQL for this small customer database company and for some kinds of scientific projects was that I had to do the installation myself. I didn't have a database administration team behind me. Therefore, I was looking for something very easy to handle. MySQL is easy to install, connect, and do all such things.

Its scalability can be better. It is probably not as scalable as Oracle. 

I had some issues with connectors. I used it from a C++ program, and it required some work to make it run, but finally, it worked.

I have been using this solution for two or three years.

I used it for a small customer database company in England with 20 employees. There were only two people using it. It was really a small solution. For this purpose, it was perfect, but I'm not sure how it scales. It was just not an issue in this case because we had very little data. 

Their technical support is fine.

It is easy to install. It takes just a few hours.

I will probably keep on using this solution. If you have a limited amount of data you want to store in the database, and you don't want to spend a lot of time on administration, it is certainly fine. 

I would rate MySQL a ten out of ten. It was perfect for our use case.