We are simultaneously using the MS SQL server and MySQL server. We first used MS SQL server and then in some projects, we required free and open-source databases. We use MySQL for those projects.

We weren't using a similar solution previously. We would prototype from things like Excel or straight-off .TXT files. I had some experience and so did my business partner, and we just decided this looked like the right answer.

I utilize Microsoft SQL Server (MSSQL) and MySQL for most of my databases. However, there are certain limitations in the new versions that impact support for certain functionalities. Due to these limitations, I have turned to MySQL as an alternative.

Since everyone in the industry we are a part of uses MySQL servers, we have also used the same.

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.

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

I've also used Postgre and SQL Server.

This product is not as solid as SQL Server. It's not like it's a lesser quality thing, however, it's not as reliable as SQL Server. The engine is a whole different engine. SQL Server is a full-featured database engine, and MySQL is based on what we call a file-based database. It's like flat files as a database engine, so it's an underdog, if you can call it that, when it comes to database engines. That said, it works fine.

We did not previously use a different solution.

I have used several versions of Oracle MySQL including 10, 11, and 12, and I don't really see any difference between them.

MySQL has been the only solution for all of our web projects.

MySQL has replaced Microsoft SQL Server in several cases. MySQL is easier to manage and much more cost-effective.

Somewhere down the line, I got introduced to MariaDB as well. Nowadays, I use MariaDB rather than MySQL most of the time.

We have previously used a solution for location and mapping-related stuff. Our choice to move to MySQL was dictated by software. So, we use different programs for applications.

This is the first solution we've used. We don't use any other product. It's very popular with the in-house program, as we advised them to stick with this application.

Previously, we only used Oracle databases, which were expensive. We've moved away to other DBs and have begun to use MySQL.

I have evaluated MariaDB.

I didn't use any other solution before implementing MySQL. We also use MariaDB, but not on a very big scale.

I have used various databases in the past, but for my current business needs, MySQL is ideal.

Previously, we used MSSQL and switched to MySQL because of performance issues.

I used phpMyAdmin. It is also a graphical interface but you have to buy the product while MySQL Workbench is free.

In addition to MySQL, we use Oracle and Microsoft SQL Server.

Oracle is an enterprise-level product but it is very straightforward to install and it has sufficient documentation and guides, which we did not easily find for MySQL.

We did not use a different solution for the applications that use MySQL. I mostly use Oracle for larger, enterprise software.

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.

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.

We did not use another solution prior to the current one. 

I have previously used SQL Server.

This was the first database solution that we used. I have used other database products such as Oracle, for example. Oracle comes at a heavy cost.

MySQL Support Services by Percona. I switched to Oracle MySQL services because of a better ROI.

We did not use a solution prior to this one.

Before using MySQL I used Oracle and Informix for RDBMS.

I use a lot of databases including MySQL, Microsoft SQL Server, Oracle, and PostgreSQL. 

The performance of SQL Server and Oracle is better than MySQL. The two alternatives have other features, as well.

No.

We used many SQL database solutions like PostgreSQL and SQLite and NoSQL databases like MongoDB. The choice depends on the project.

Previously, we used Microsoft database.

Prior to MySQL, we did not use another database for this purpose. We built our core product directly on top of MySQL.

For Windows development of non-critical solutions, we previously used SQL Server Express exclusively. However, now we use either SQL Server Express or MySQL, depending on the customer. We have not switched from SQL Server Express to MySQL.

There was no solution in use previously.

We use various versions, but most of the time this is based on the client's requirements.

I've used a lot of different solutions. MySQL is one of the top among them. Usability and scalability are some of the reasons we went with MySQL.

Yeah, we used to cheat off MySQL. But in the end, it was somebody else's design. So, we migrated to MySQL. We just migrated from there to here.

We used Microsoft SQL and Postgres.

I have experience with other full-scale databases, such as PostgreSQL. For use cases where I need full functionality, I would use another product.

Not applicable. No previous solution.

We switched to a different solution because of data access issues, speed, and consistency.

I have not used a solution like this before.

Yes, I first used Microsoft SQL Server, then I went to MySQL because the cost is lower.

We tried Oracle for a while but it was too much of a resource hog.

We were using PostgreSQL. The reason why we switched to this solution was that of the easy administration.

We did not use a different solution before.

We are primarily interested in Red Hat technology. As a result, we have primarily worked with Red Hat products.

This virtualization is built into Red Hat Hyperconverged Infrastructure.

We use both Red Hat Enterprise Linux, and Red Hat Hyperconverged Infrastructure.

No.

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

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

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

MS Access. It wasn't compatible with my project.

No previous solution was used.

We use Cisco ASA and Nagios devices alongside the MySQL server as our network infrastructure needs expanding and required more serious hardware solutions.

We have been using many different types of databases, and will most likely use this one for part of our systems, as it is has so much integration.

We did upgrade the version with improvements to the product.

We switched due to cost saving reasons.

I have used MS SQL and Oracle. However, now I have no money and am using MySQL.