MySQL Reviews

MYSQL is our main database. We use it for every project.

I use it for storage procedures, SQL administration, and database administration.

We also use it for the development of reports, and projects that are deployed for our customers. It is also used to develop applications.

The majority of companies use it for their development projects.

It's free. I'm in a big organization, with more than 100,000 employees. If you have to buy a database management system for every project, it would be very expensive. 

Considering the cost-free option, you can use it for POCs,(proof of concept projects), and you can deploy it for customers to reduce project costs. The principal reason is that it is cheap.

Mysql is free : it's an open source project, so you can use it with no cost.

Mysql is well documented, and has a big community.

MySQL adheres to the current SQL standard, although with significant restrictions and a large number of extensions. Through the configuration setting sql-mode you can make the MySQL server behave for the most part compatibly with others like IBM DB/2 and Oracle.

There are a number of convenient user interfaces for administering a MySQL server.

MySQL has supported the storing and processing of two-dimensional geographical data. Thus MySQL is well suited for geographic information systems applications.

MySQL supports the ODBC interface.

For client programming you can use, among others, the languages C#, C, C++, Java, Perl, PHP and Python.

I would like to see a feature added to be able to handle high availability, which would allow us to scale the database or the system on many platforms.

Scalability has to be improved, as you have only one instance of the application, or two, or more instances at max that are connected on one instance of MySQL.

In the next release, I would like to see the scalability features improved to allow you to configure it and reduce the complexity with the configuration, making it easier for the end-user to scale. Make it as simple as it can be.

Add the possibility to define custom data types 

Add OLAP and backup capabilities

I have been using MySQL for more than five years.

It is stable, and in fact, it's more stable than PostgreSQL. Also, recovery is faster.

Scalability is difficult. You can scale it horizontally, but once you have many instances, it is difficult.

You can improve the server, resources that are available, and the processor is good but if you want to scale it on many instances than it is a bit complex.

We use it for customers. We have 10 instances of MySQL independently, on the project we are currently working with.

It's an open-source solution. There is documentation available on the internet, that provides enough to resolve issues quickly.

If you are a technician with practice, there is no issue, it's easy to handle. The documentation is available on the internet. You have everything you need quickly if you are autonomous.

It's easy, you just download it, install it and click next until it's complete.

It's an open-source database management system that can be used free of charge.

I am not using the user interface because I'm a developer. Generally, I just try to find how to use the command-line interface to access what I want for the system.

Oracle is still the best, but it's too expensive.

Before purchasing this solution, know the needs of your environment and be sure that you don't have to scale it. If you want to scale it you will require more knowledge on the product and you will need more support for it.

If you have a little project with a thousand users connected to the instances, it will be able to be scaled. But if you are looking to be able to handle large volumes this is not a good solution for your needs.

If am comparing MySQL with other free solutions then I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.

We're using MySQL for data warehousing and logging.

Even for the best database, we always want the database to perform much better, so we wish MySQL would be much better, in terms of performance. When they release a new version, they mostly concentrate on scalability and performance.

I've been using MySQL for seven years.

The stability of MySQL is good.

MySQL is a fully scalable product.

The initial setup of MySQL was easy and straightforward. You can complete the initial setup for this product within a few hours.

It was the technical team who did the setup for MySQL. We had two or three engineers who took care of the deployment and maintenance of this product.

MySQL is very cheap. In fact, it could be free. They also have a yearly licensing option. I don't remember paying for additional costs, aside from the standard licensing fee.

I evaluated Oracle Database.

I'm using the Enterprise version of MySQL.

MySQL is a good database. We are using it, and we'll continue to use it.

I've never contacted the technical support team for MySQL. I have no complaints.

I can recommend MySQL to others who plan to start implementing it.

We don't ask for new features on a database. When we take a database, we take it because of fixed features, e.g. its current features. It's not an application. It's a database. We are fine with whatever features MySQL offers now. We never really thought about whether we want more features on this product.

I'm rating MySQL an eight out of ten.

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.

Due to the open source licensing model, it has allowed small businesses like ours to adopt enterprise-grade database systems without incurring significant licensing costs.

• Open-source
• Multi-platform
• Lightweight
• Simple to set up, configure and tune
• Support for enterprise-grade features like clustering, master-slave replication, even Sharding (to some extent) which is an advanced feature

It would be helpful if there were a graphical user interface to administer, configure, and tune it.

If it had something similar to Microsoft’s DTS engine then it would be the best database system out there.

For the scale at which my systems are operating, the software is stable. We are at most dealing with less than 10 million rows of data across all tables, and concurrent connections under 200 at our peak loads.

No scalability issues at the scale at which my systems are operating. One thing I did encounter with an earlier version of MySQL 5 – the mysql process will not automatically use available CPU cores on the server, even if it was a dual or quad core CPU. I was troubleshooting a scalability issue when I saw this, it maxed out just a single core and left the other three (in my quad core CPU server) idle. There was a specific condition / trigger that will make the mysql process span the other available cores (I can’t recall now but a quick googling likely will uncover this).

We did not subscribe to professional support from MySQL AB or Oracle. However, the wealth of community support is outstanding. Most of the issues faced could be resolved by knowledge shared by the MySQL community.

I’ve used SQL Server and Oracle for database systems. SQL Server is an excellent solution, in particular the DTS (Data Transformation System) which is not available for MySQL. Switching to MySQL for two reasons: 1) licensing costs 2) the application supports MySQL primarily, and has poor support for SQL Server.

Very easy to set up, relatively easy to configure, tune, and use the conf file, as long as you are comfortable mucking around in Linux conf text files and working from the command line (I am).

You could use the installer which would be the easiest way, but setting up by hand is not too difficult either – instructions can be found online and following them step by step usually works fine.

MySQL Enterprise Support is not cheap, though might still be cheaper than Oracle or SQL Server. They may not have local support depending on where you’re based, but there are many smaller agencies out there that will readily provide support. You’ll need to spend some time looking around.

I’d been using other database systems like Microsoft’s SQL Server and Oracle Database before trying out MySQL. There are forks of MySQL maintained outside of Oracle, like MariaDB and Aurora (by Amazon Web Services). I have not really tried them but I don’t expect very big differences; in fact, for most use cases you may not observe any difference. There would be the few unique features in MariaDB and Aurora that are not present in the original MySQL feature set (I know there are but don’t remember the specifics).

As long as your application supports it well, and you are familiar with the scaling options and its limitations, you can’t go very wrong with MySQL, as it is a very mature product by now. If you are fairly competent with servers and databases you could start off without subscribing to Enterprise Support, and may be able to get by quite well. If things get more complicated, or scalability starts to become a problem, then you may consider paying for help.

I use the product as a backend to my application.

The product is flexible and easy to use.

The interface could be improved.

I have been using the solution for seven to ten years. I am using the latest version of the solution.

I rate the tool’s stability a nine out of ten. The stability is good.

I rate the tool’s scalability a seven out of ten. We have four direct users and more than 1000 indirect users. We use the tool twice a week.

I rate the ease of setup an eight out of ten. The deployment took a few minutes. We need two system administrators to maintain the tool.

The deployment was done in-house. We need one system administrator to deploy the tool.

I rate the pricing a seven or six out of ten on a scale of one to ten, where one is cheap and ten is expensive.

We used different solutions before, but I do not know why we switched to MySQL. I recommend the solution to others. Overall, I rate the product an eight out of ten.

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. 

In our company, we are providing an application in PHP language and we need to use another database and we made the decision to use MySQL.

When comparing MySQL to other solutions it is easier to use and boots up faster. Additionally, when you want to query a lot of data, MySQL is better in performance.

The solution could improve the monitoring. At the present time, you need to use third-party monitoring solutions.

I have been using this solution for approximately one year.

When it comes to stability SQL server is better than MySQL. This is an area they could improve.

We have approximately five users using this solution in my organization.

I have previously used SQL Server.

I would recommend this solution to others.

I rate MySQL an eight out of ten.