MySQL Reviews

We are an IT services provider, so the solution is for our customers. I can't answer for the customers in terms of how they use it. 

Typically, customers are running applications that need to connect MySQL and to store some of the data.

The solution is free to use, which is its most valuable aspect.

The interface is quite good.

The stability and scalability are very good.

Overall, it's an excellent solution. We don't have to implement anything else.

We haven't noticed and features that are lacking.

From a user perspective, the initial setup could be simplified a bit.

I've been using the solution since 2000. It's been about 20 years now since I first was introduced to MySQL.

The stability is good. Neither we or our clients have had to deal with bugs, glitches or crashes. Everyone's been satisfied with it. Stability is one of its best features.

The scalability of the solution is good. We haven't had trouble scaling at all.

We're using the community version of the solution. I don't have any complaint with the level of support, however, it is online and there isn't a support line.

The initial setup isn't always straightforward. Sometimes it is complex. For example, if you are doing a database expansion. For database expansion, you have to configure it and you have to know SQL quite well. You have to juggle a few things, which makes it complicated. However, from an IT perspective, it's a good tool, so it's worth the effort.

The solution doesn't cost anything to use. It's absolutely free.

We are IT services provider, and provide this solution to our customers. It's typically installed on a dedicated server.

When we are working with it, we are doing SQL queries, and on top of that, we are using MySQL to do some reporting as well. It does what we want it to do and our clients are also happy with the results they get. It's a fine solution.

I'd advise those considering working with the solution to be patient.

We don't have any partnership MySQL. We are mostly a Microsoft partner. We mainly use the solution because of the community and the SQL server that's different from Oracle's server. From time to time we have to use MySQL.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten. From our perspective, it's free to use, it's stable and it's fast and scalable. It makes it a good option for many organizations.

MySQL is strongly recommended for web applications and LAMP architecture systems. The most valuable feature of this product for me is its graphical interface which allows me to do the database administration easily. Another important feature is its reliability, the decent performance, and the fact it is an open source product.

It gives us the opportunity to create backups of our databases easily and loop through them with minimum effort.

I think that the stored procedures and the development tools to write and debug large queries could be improved.

I have used MySQL for about 10 years.

There were no issues with stability.

There was no issue with scalability.

We have not used technical support. The community is large enough to find the solution when something comes up.

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

The initial setup was straightforward.

I think that the Open Source product would cover the needs of most projects. In some cases, the advanced features are needed. They could use the enterprise edition, which is reasonably priced.

We have evaluated and used different products like SQLite. It depends on the requirements and the needs of the project.

I believe that it is the ideal solution for a variety of projects with a small learning curve compared to other solutions. It allows you to be efficient quickly.

We are basically using it for our applications.

I like the JSON stuff.

Since we upgraded from 8.0.12 to 8.0.22, it has had some slowness-related issues. Some of the queries that were fast previously are quite slow now. I did some research, and I found many people complaining about it.

I've been working with this for two and a half years, and they have been using it for 10 to 15 years.

We are using a cluster now, but I don't administrate that. There are thousands of users.

I would rate it a seven out of 10.

Speed and stability of the MySQL DB are the most valuable features since we use it as the data store for most of our web applications.

Before we used MySQL, we used to access the data used for the dynamic web pages directly from our enterprise data stores and that was a massive performance bottleneck. With MySQL, the data can be accessed much faster. This allowed us to create more complicated web systems, such as the corporate message system and a credit card paying system.

From where we are, most of the improvements are being handled. With the new improvements that were introduced in MySQL 5.7 and with the testing that we have done to this point, we are looking at updating our web development environment to make better use of the new features.

With the push from MySQL to implement database engines which can provide the same functionality as PostgreSQL and MongoDB, we are looking at application development that leverages this functionality on our current MySQL production database. Seeing that MySQL can provide noSQL document storage the same way MongoDB can and still have a SQL data source next to it creates the possibility of using the best features of both to achieve the desired application result without changing our current infrastructure drastically.

It must be noted that we are still in the process of experimentation to find the best ways of utilizing these data technologies in our current enterprise applications, but not having to move to other database providers to have the functionality means we can experiment without the need to change our base processes. So when I say that the improvements are being handled the MySQL development team have given us access to functionality which we started to look at about two years ago.

I have used this solution for around seven years with upgrades.

There were no stability issues.

We did experience a few scalability issues, but we decided to rather go for a bigger server than creating a cluster and that worked out very well.

The technical support is very good

The setup was very straightforward since the out-of-the-box MySQL's performance is already very good.

We had to do some tweaking over time, but nothing too major.

The enterprise version has a number of extra components that makes it worth the price, but if all you want is a stable DB for web applications, then stick to the open version.

We use enterprise because we use the PAM connector and the DB firewall, if you are looking at the pricing for implementing a separate data firewall, it is more than what you will pay for this solution.

There were not a lot of other options open to us.

Ensure you know what you want to use it for and make sure it is the right fit for the job.

Do not allow developers to tell you what your DB should look like, as that is the best way to performance problems. Use the MySQL Workbench and MySQL Monitor.

ACID attributes are the most valuable feature, as data reliability is a top concern.

The backend of the production traffic happens at this level.

The dynamic scalability, clustering, dynamic replicas safeguard against failures, ease of setup and use all need to be improved.

• MySQL was originally meant for a single server; now with the 5.7 version, they have introduced the multi-master model but it is on the user to ensure that there is no conflict of data. Also, to add/remove a server from the cluster requires downtime and MySQL won't scale load on its own as it has scaled up/down (the load distribution has to be done on a separate layer).
• MySQL does not understand the clustered model, it is not aware of others in the cluster and won't act as a player in the cluster.
• Data corruption or two different updates to the same record are not sorted in the replicas and needs manual intervention.
• The cluster setup is complex and so is its maintenance.
• It is not equipped to take advantage of the Cloud (AWS, Azure etc) and their pricing models (go as you use).

I have used this solution for two years.

We have seen the corruption of data in replication when used with filters and also, with the growing data response time dwindles.

A lot of manual effort is needed to scale the solution; a lot of room for improvement is there.

The setup was of mid-level complexity.

It is a GPL license, only the support is priced but as there is a good community so buying support is optional.

I wasn't involved as this predates me at the organization, but today if this re-happens MySQL won't be the best choice.

Do your research and make sure for your use case that MySQL is the best choice, before making any commitments.

I do not recall which version I am using. 

Although we do not use it for the main core system, the solution acts as a database which is useful for login applications, data warehousing. 

The solution is so stable. I have encountered no problems. 

The solution could be more secure.

I have been using MySQL for a year. 

The solution is very stable. 

The solution is not scalable at present. 

I do not have experience with technical support. 

Previously, we used Microsoft database.

The solution is easy to install.

I cannot state how long implementation took. 

The solution does not come with a licensing fee. 

I do not know the number of users who are using the solution in my organization. 

I would absolutely recommend this solution to others. 

I rate MySQL as a seven out of ten. 

We store mostly the metadata-related information and that's our primary use case for MySQL, storing a transactional database. 

This is a good traditional database, it supports JSON and it is whatever you need for a simple solution. It fits well, is easy to use and provides good service.

I'd like to see some additional JSON query support in the solution. 

The stability is fine. 

The scalability of the solution is fine although we haven't tested it too much. 

There is no need to contact technical support. 

The initial setup is very easy, it's not a big installation and there's no effort required with maintenance-related issues because it's a whole product and is more stabilized. So I don't recall any issues and getting issues on the database side.

I would recommend this product if it suits your needs. 

I rate this solution an eight out of 10.

We are an asset management product company. Our product is deployed on the cloud and the backend database for it is MySQL.

The technical support should be more knowledgeable and available worldwide.

We have been using MySQL for the past five to six years.

So far, it has been pretty stable and I haven't had any problems. We plan to continue using it in the future.

MySQL is very scalable, so I don't expect any challenges.

We have a contract with a third-party for support. So far, it has been working fine for us and I don't see any challenges. That said, having worldwide support is something that would be an improvement.

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

The initial setup seemed pretty decent, so I don't see any challenge in that regard.

Our in-house DBA team installed it. We have one DBA and one junior.

This is a good product and I recommend it to others.

We use it as a data store and from that perspective, we get everything we need. We don't have any complaints about features such as analytics, reports, or dashboards.

I would rate this solution a six out of ten.