MariaDB Reviews

We use MariaDB for any instance where we need faster retrieval and processing rates, such as establishing relationships between data entities through entity relationship mapping. MariaDB is our preference for structured data, like user details or product information. However, for handling non-structured data, such as metadata, we prefer DynamoDB or MongoDB.

MariaDB is inherently faster than MySQL database. However, given the opportunity, our team would have likely chosen Postgres for better performance in terms of concurrency, etc.

MariaDB is likely less resource-intensive than Postgres and other RDMS solutions because it offers only a subset of features.

Concurrency is a challenge in MariaDB.

I have been using MariaDB for a year.

Ten engineers are using this solution.

It's open source, but there are no dedicated technical support resources.

The deployment should be easier because we use AWS EC2 instances to run and deploy the image and the services. It took a few hours to complete.

It's an open-source solution that only charges for a server database.

I rate the solution's pricing an eight or nine out of ten, where one is expensive, and ten is cheap.

A few EC2 instances are running that solve the MySQL and the service. 

Cross-functional GUIs are currently available. For example, we use DB Workbench, a solution that provides a GUI interface for MySQL, PostgreSQL, MariaDB, and several other databases.

It is seamless unless we want more advanced features, like simple database charting or event scheduling, which MariaDB doesn't support.

Our security team and platform team maintain security features. So, it depends on the type of protocols they use.

There are no particular challenges because the development kit, such as all the SD cases that are DB connectors, is well supported by Python and Java.

Our AI projects' data comes from non-relational sources like Mongo and Dynamo. Therefore, there's no direct correlation. However, MariaDB merely serves as a repository for information, such as profile data or some form of structured text (NTT), which can be displayed in tables or otherwise.

It depends on whether they prioritize performance and features. If so, they might prefer Postgres. However, MariaDB could be the better choice if they prioritize a time-tested solution and lower costs.

MariaDB offers more features than its competitors. It supports features like sharding and concurrent connections.

Overall, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.

I use MariaDB in my company to process the data for the database, so it is just for storage and analytics-related areas.

The most valuable features of the solution stem from the fact that it is a cloud-based tool, so it is pretty fast. The product is also considered to be an SQL-compliant solution.

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.

A cloud-based tool that offers great speed with a need to improve in the area of document caching.

Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten.

Scalability-wise, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.

Around 300 people in my company use the solution on a daily basis.

I rate the technical support a five out of ten.

Neutral

There was another solution in our company before MariaDB was introduced. My company moved to MariaDB as it was imposed or forced on us by the vendor named Appian since they prefer MariaDB for databases.

The product's initial setup phase was easy.

The solution is deployed on a public cloud by AWS.

The solution can be deployed in a few hours.

The product's setup phase was taken care of by a third party, Appian.

I have seen a return on investment from the use of the product since it helps my company save time.

I rate the product's price a three on a scale of one to ten, where one is low price, and ten is high price since there are some support costs involved, even though it isn't an open-source solution.

One person, who is the database administrator, is required to maintain the product.

I rate the overall solution a seven out of ten.

The solution is essentially an enterprise application. In our setup, there was a considerable amount of data being utilized. Later, the application shifted to the cloud, and for this cloud migration, we opted for a database switch from Oracle to MariaDB. That's why we migrated all the data and components to MariaDB.

The standout feature is the multitude of features available. There isn't a specific feature that's unavailable in other databases. The key differentiator is the speed. 

When referring to it as a hard code, the core size is crucial. In MariaDB, we can employ multi-processing, allowing users to make use of the core and process data more efficiently and swiftly.

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.

I have been using this solution for four years. 

There have been some issues. If you need to provide 24/7 availability, you have to follow the active-subprivate mode, where one application is active and the second is down. So, other substitute techniques, like mirroring and scrubber techniques, are also available for such scenarios.

It is a scalable solution. It easily scales up and scales down. 

The customer service and support are okay. But the response time is slow. 

Moreover, the material is not available freely.  

Neutral

We have used several databases like MySQL, Oracle, and NoSQL MongoDB. We have tried a number of solutions, so we have that experience.

We switched due to its features. It is a lightweight application, making it the best choice for our lightweight applications.

The initial setup is straightforward. It's not a big deal.

I have deployed it on the cloud, using Linux and everything.  It can be deployed within a day. 

When we were doing the technical evaluation, we considered MariaDB, Finsecure, and AWS cloud databases. Based on that, we made the decision.

Overall, I would rate the solution a five out of ten.

It's a relational database, so it's mainly used for structured data. We use it for some of our in-house applications.

For us the benefit is that the system is very stable, so we don't have many outages. We also have a lot of experience with MariaDB, so we can optimally configure MariaDB and deploy a well-tuned environment.

I like the global transaction IDs (GTIDs) feature. It's quite reliable for replication between a master and a replica server, and it's a feature that MySQL also has but implemented differently. 

Another thing I like is the flashback feature, which allows you to roll back a transaction from the binary logs, so you can retrieve data. If someone deleted data, you can flash it back. That's a feature I really appreciate.

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.

I have nearly 13 years of experience working extensively with MySQL, and in recent years, I've also gained proficiency with MariaDB. Since MariaDB is closely related to MySQL, my combined experience with both platforms spans over a decade. Currently, we're utilizing version 10.4, although it's a few iterations behind the most recent release. We're actively preparing to undertake an upgrade in the near future.

It is a quite stable solution. 

If you want to scale it for larger use cases, like sharding, you'd need to consider MariaDB SkySQL or Xpand, which is a separate product designed for cloud deployments. So, for realistic scalability, especially in the cloud, you might need to use MariaDB SkySQL.

We have a couple of hundred users currently working with the database. It's probably around 400.

It's currently deployed on-premises, but we're planning to move it to the cloud in the future.

It's not difficult to maintain. It does require some maintenance, but it's very stable. You don't really need to intervene much, so it's quite stable. The main maintenance we do is patching and upgrading once a year. So it's not too taxing to maintain.

I have used MySQL or Oracle products. 

MariaDB, being open source, is a significant advantage, especially considering we use the enterprise edition. It's considerably much cheaper than Oracle, which is a proprietary database with high licensing costs. So, from a financial perspective, MariaDB is far more economical. 

Another advantage lies in its robust online community, simplifying troubleshooting and assistance. While we do have enterprise support, the online community and resources are quite valuable. 

As for cons, due to fewer contributors compared to other databases like MariaDB, certain features might experience slower development. Amazon and MariaDB Corporation are among the contributors, but it's an area that could use more attention. However, overall, MariaDB remains a strong choice.

MariaDB emerged as a distinct entity originating from MySQL, rather than being an inherent part of it. Formed in 2009 due to apprehensions that Oracle Corporation might negatively impact MySQL, which they acquired in 2010.

When deciding between MySQL and MariaDB, the feature disparity is minimal. MySQL has adeptly upheld compatibility since the transition, making it primarily a matter of personal preference. Some features differ between MariaDB and MySQL, catering to unique preferences.

In essence, MariaDB is a highly favored relational database, a commendable choice within the relational database realm. For those seeking a relational database, MariaDB stands as a solid option. As for purchasing a database, MariaDB comes highly recommended. It claims the second-highest rank globally and holds the second spot in the DB-Engines ranking. MongoDB ranks a bit lower, but the choice between the two is essentially equivalent.

On the whole, I would assign a rating of seven out of ten to this solution.

We use MariaDB for industrial automation. We log some tags, and we keep the tags in the database or historical storage.

It is very simple to install, and the commands are exactly the same as MySQL.

The learning curve is small and standardized, and not anything complicated. Other than that, it isn’t much different than other solutions. It's very similar to MySQL, but a little bit more light-weighted compared to it. Unless you do a very heavy login of data, it will be fine. It is based on AWS, and MariaDB is good for certain things. 

It should work across all fields like SQLite, as it is the basis of any application, even apps for phones and the like.

Usually, we are capable of handling our programs. We rarely use customer support. One time I got in touch with Oracle's customer service, but it was just one time. In general, we can handle the issues by ourselves. We are not really lower-level users and are all skilled with the programs. 

I have used PostgreSQL and Oracle. PostgreSQL and MariaDB are quite similar and we still use it.

The initial setup is very simple. The deployment was done within a few minutes.

I always use the free version.

I would rate MariaDB almost an eight out of ten.

I think it's a pretty useful database. It's very simple to install and that's one of the very positive things about it because sometimes if you go into tools like Oracle, it is more difficult. It is not just the downloading of the installer on any computer from Linux or Mac or Windows. MariaDB works in a blink of an eye, and the database runs right away.

We mostly use MariaDB on smaller systems, not for mission critical systems. For mission critical systems, we use Oracle.

We're using version 10.5. The solution is deployed on-premises.

We're a very centralized operation. We install the system on an application, the application runs the services, and people consume those services. We have three systems running this on the database.

The cost is much lower than other solutions, especially if you look at the functionality compared to MySQL.

The speed and functionality are the most valuable features. Compared to other solutions, there is more value and functionality for the cost. 

The replication is much easier, and I like the administrative portal.

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.

I have used MariaDB for over one year.

The solution can run for months without any issues.

I would rate the stability as 8 out of 10.

The scalability improves if you use the distributed database. In our case, the performance has been good enough for the applications we use. We haven't had any performance issues to warrant improving it beyond one node. We moved the storage to SSD, so the performance is good from a basic setup.

I would rate the scalability as eight out of ten. It's a little bit complex.

We haven't needed to resort to technical support. Most of the time, we look at the documentation, and we're able to work out things on our own.

I have also used MySQL. When Oracle purchased MySQL, it was split into two options: the official version and the open source version. We started having a divergence in the updates, and then the open source version got left behind. We thought it was too caught up in a big enterprise and it wouldn't get the same attention. It was probably stifled because it was going to create competition for Oracle. We thought that maybe MariaDB was catching up fast, getting more features, and improving much faster than MySQL.

Initial setup is very easy. If you're used to MySQL, it's easy, but things get a little bit complex when you're setting up replication. We can get the solution running in less than an hour.

Implementation was done in-house. We required one person for deployment. They are a database administrator.

One person is needed for maintenance. It's a very economical system. Once you get it up and running, there's very little maintenance needed.

You just need to monitor it and see if the IO performance is good. If anything, you have to optimize your queries.

I would rate the setup as nine out of ten.

The cost is quite good. You can have the open source, free version, which has adequate capacity. Compared to Oracle, MariaDB has a more flexible policy and less officials. Oracle is too big of an organization, and they do certain things that leave a sour taste in our mouth. Dealing with a smaller company is sometimes better, especially for smaller systems.

I would rate the licensing cost as nine out of 10.

We also evaluated PostgreSQL.

With our experience with MySQL, we thought we needed to convert most of the queries to PostgreSQL. MariaDB was much closer to MySQL than to PostgreSQL, and PostgreSQL hasn't moved quickly enough compared to MariaDB.

PostgreSQL is quite high end, but there were differences in the syntax of the scale. We didn't want to be involved in converting the syntax.

I would rate this solution as nine out of ten. 

It has a lower cost of ownership, and you need less effort to get it up and running. There's less effort in getting to know the system compared to other database systems. I would encourage people to move to it, especially if they've already used MySQL.

We use MariaDB for small and middle-sized applications of all kinds. It is primarily used for database operations and functions as a database server.

We use some asynchronous master-slave implementations and synchronous multi-master Galera setups.

The only potential area for improvement could be the pricing model, which might benefit from being more flexible or a bit cheaper.

I have been working with MariaDB for five years.

MariaDB is very stable. I would rate its stability a nine out of ten.

MariaDB is fine for small and middle-sized databases. However, for very large environments, I would hesitate as I don't think that MariaDB is limitless scalable. There is a decisive difference between MariaDB and larger databases like Oracle.

The initial setup of MariaDB is simple enough.

My colleagues or I usually do the setup. We install and configure everything, and once it's running, the client takes over with the application setup.

I have found the price of commercial MariaDB to be pretty steep, although not as high as Oracle. Customers often prefer the Community Edition because it's free.

MariaDB's main competitors are MySQL, Oracle, and Postgres. I think Postgres is the sharpest competitor to MariaDB.

I would fully recommend MariaDB. It is stable, performs well, and is relatively easy to handle. Overall, it has good basic functionality.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

I use MariaDB in my company to build simple web applications.

The most valuable feature of the solution is its interface, including the web interface and the CLI.

There is no guide provided to first-time users by the solution. For first-time users, there should be some sort of guide provided by the solution explaining what the product offers so that they don't have to search for it on Google. The very first time that users use the product, they should be able to use the database server and move it to phpMyAdmin.

MariaDB's GUI is an area with certain shortcomings where improvements are required.

I have been using MariaDB for more than a year.

I haven't faced any technical issues with the product, and it works fine. Suppose users have some other databases running in the environment apart from MariaDB. In that case, it might occupy the port that MariaDB's server is trying to use, so you might not be able to access it. There are no technical issues related to the solution unless there is another database in the same environment where MariaDB functions, making it an area where users must be careful.

The product has scalability features, but I haven't reached the level where I have to use them. If you know where to change the tool's configurations, it can scale up.

Though I still work with MariaDB, I have moved to Firebase and MySQL.

I have experience with some other tools in the past. The interface areas offered by other tools in the market are much better than the ones offered by MariaDB. The interface offered by MySQL databases is better than MariaDB's GUI.

The product's initial setup phase can be done straight out of the box, as it works fine.

The product's initial setup phase didn't require much time because MariaDB was already embedded within XAMPP, so it was easy to use and access since I only had to launch it. You may want to change the user credentials for the password before you can access it and use it from the CLI.

Price-wise, the product is affordable. The product is not expensive.

I rate the overall product an eight out of ten.