MySQL Reviews

Small to medium-sized business usage. The main advantage is the very large user base. This enables users to fix about any issue by answering any question. From a technical viewpoint, MySQL is on par with the other open source database solutions.

Due to the large user base, a large amount of software modules and plugins for rapid application development are possible. From an operational viewpoint, this is also a very big advantage.

The large user base and the amount of available plugins and modules. A lot of the software components have been trialed and tested for often more than 10 years. It is rock solid from that viewpoint.

It does not stand out regarding scalability. When the company size increases, the user base having actual experience with (very) large MySQL solutions is reduced.

No, it is rock solid.

Yes, other solutions have better features and better performance.

Not applicable.

No.

The initial setup is very easy with very good online support.

Implementation was done in-house.

Not applicable.

When you know the setup will continue to grow, make sure you have the paid support. 

MariaDB/Galera.

Primary DBMS solution for web apps developed on either ASP.NET MVC or Zend / PHP for customers.

The community version of MySQL only offers simple backup and restore tools, but it is OK for many web dev projects for customers that want a low budget solution.

We do software development for our customers on both Windows and Linux. Since these tools are available for both Windows and Linux, we can leverage the knowledge of these tools for development on both platforms.

We design web solutions for customers with PHP (Linux) and ASP.NET MVC (Windows). MySQL offers a simple, no frills, but effective DBMS solution with a very low hardware footprint. Since it has no licensing fees, it offers great TCO for our customers.

Only one of the engines, InnoDB, supports ACID transaction control. The best performance engine, MyISAM, has no transactional control support.

It would make a lot of sense to include one engine that offers both very good overall performance and transactional control support.

All versions of MySQL, including the Community Server version include in its design as a Pluggable Storage Engine Architecture.

This architecture allows for the support of multiple options of Storage Engines, so, a software architect can design a sofware solution with MySQL based on a specific Storage Engine that is capable to cater to a particular type of storage use case requirements, like for instance, web applications with heavy read workloads and moderate write workloads, or intranet desktop applications with heavy write workloads.

Depending on the version of Community Server installed is the list of available Storage Engines: All it takes is the execution of the command SHOW ENGINES to retrieve the list of installed Storage Engine plugins.

When you create any given table in MySQL, you have the option to select what Storage Engine (among the engines available) will be applied to said table. If this option is no explicitly mentioned at the end of the "CREATE TABLE" command, the current default storage engine will be assumed.

For web apps with intensive read workloads and moderate write workloads, the engine that offers a good overall performance is the MyISAM engine, but this does not support ACID transaction control, and it uses a table-level locking mechanism (thus, from a performance standpoint, this is not proper for apps with heavy write workloads).

The InnoDB engine uses a record-level locking mechanism, so, it is proper for apps with heavy write workloads. It also supports Isolation Levels, which is important for applications that have many clients doing read and write operations concurrently.

The other storage engines offer support for very specific use cases, like for instance, flat file tables (CSV engine) or memory-only tables (Memory engine).

Getting back to the InnoDB engine, it offers features that are similar to the database engine in SQL Server, and according to some of benchmarks that we have run, SQL Server Express provides overall better performance than MySQL Community Server with InnoDB tables.

My "Room for Improvement" comment is that it would be great if in the future Oracle were to provide with the Community Server edition a version of InnoDB with better overall performance, while still requiring a small hardware footprint.

As with any good DBMS, MySQL requires periodic DBA maintenance. If you leave a MySQL database with no supervision of a DBA for enough time, files become too fragmented and they may turn corrupt beyond rescue.

The version of the product with free licensing does not offer stellar scalability support. We only use these tools for solutions that do not require such a level of scalability.

The version of the product with free licensing only offers community forum support. Because it is a very popular product, there are many free resources on the internet to search for solutions to most issues.

This kind of "free support" is OK, because we do not use these tools for mission critical solutions.

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.

The admin tools offered by MySQL Workbench are very good. For an experienced DBA, it is rather easy to setup a (MySQL) server for development, testing, pre-production, or production environments.

Implementation was done with in-house team.

With no licensing fees, the business opportunity is great for both the customer and an ISV like my company. This is the case, as long as you use these tools for non-critical solutions.

We did evaluate other solutions, mainly PostGreSQL, which is also a very good product.

We run a benchmark comparison first, then we run a small lab with the development of a small solution with both toolsets (MySQL and PostGreSQL).

In this development comparison, we found that the winner is MySQL. MySQL toolset for development offers much more coverage for both PHP and C# development.

Most small and medium enterprises require many non-critical solutions. They clearly they do not have large budgets for these kinds of solutions, so it makes a lot of sense to consider MySQL as a good option for this kind of development.

The advice is to make sure that it works for your company and for your customers.

Used as a data store for RESTful web services and other web applications. Was deployed to store RSS feeds, and for 100 joomla instances. 

MySQL is widely supported. We were able to integrate it with several different projects using various different programming languages with no issues.

Worked with Java, Perl, PHP, C# and C code. 

MySQL’s strength is in its fast connection, query and insert performance. I’ve benchmarked MySQL against several NoSQL and SQL databases and found it to be faster for getting lots of data inserted quickly.

The weakest link is replication. MySQL’s replication is touchy and doesn’t support master-to-master setups.

MySQL’s replication was implemented by playing back SQL statements getting executed on the master database node. That means if a slave node gets behind, it has to catch up by running every SQL query that has executed on the master. When the slave gets too far out of date, it is unable to catch up because the replication log is lost. 

Master to master replication is used to allow writes to either node in the cluster (INSERT, UPDATE, DELETE).  Since MySQL does not support this, you can only safely send SELECT queries to slave nodes.  If you run an insert, update or delete against the slave node, then it is out of sync with the master and may break if a later replication event comes from the master on the same table.

I’ve had an issue where an InnoDB database grew too big and got corrupted. I was unable to recover it because there was not enough space on the server either. Be sure to have enough space.

We did encounter some scalability issues as it has limited clustering support, it requires scaling up rather than out to some degree. Of course, you can have read replicas. It also has a fall-off on performance with very high workloads, but it takes awhile to get there.

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

The security model is different than the other databases.

There are tuning and monitoring benefits for people who purchase MySQL rather than using the free version.

Looked at Microsoft SQL Server and PostgreSQL. 

The porting code to or from MySQL is not that complicated, but the date type/format and functions are the biggest hurdles. Handling booleans data type is less efficient than the BIT type in the SQL Server.

• Vertical scalabity on hardware
• Better hardware usage
• Access performance
• Addressing consistency, scalability and performance issues

Storage and searching quickly on data is no longer an issue facing us using Excel.

Hardware scalability and parallel treatment can and will be improved in the next few years.

For 15 years now.

No, there are only strategies applied by a data scale interval (less than 200 go, less than 1 to, and more than 15 to).

Always due to architecture, data storage, and data requesting irrelevant strategies.

High. There is a lot of documentation, a lot of expertise, and a lot of projects in the world.

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

Don't use the license version. Open source is enough.

There are a lot of alternative to paid features. It's very hard to find support for this feature.

You will have a lot of work, but you will also avoid a lot of issues due to product immaturity on the database market.

Usually, we use the application for our team to ensure the data is correct.

We majorly use the application now. We can use MySQL to read for our select queries. This helps us to achieve stability.

In MySQL, you can only have one master. The master's scalability was always a problem.

The cost towards the locking and the patent. What happens, we will be running the MySQL network, and what happens sometimes in some cases, the master go down. Thus, we have to theoretically play the whole thing. The chances are quite high that you are going to lose some important data.

If we can make them implement the system so we are not losing our data, then magically you could say the system would be better.

12 years.

No. Not on the MySQL site.

No. Not so far. I didn't see any problems in its scalability.

We are using the community portal technical support, but when we are reaching them, the support is always awesome.

I can give them a 10 out of 10. The best.

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.

It always depends on the use case. The first case was complex where we ended up rewriting all of the test code better than MySQL.

It always depends on the scenarios of the requirement - what all the current scenarios come from. Are these application teams or is that someone who is just getting the product? If someone majorly bunt because they don't want to use a single point of data, we may end up choosing any other solution.

Usually, we would pick a MySQL because of our DBS, because we know how we can boot up or pick on a use case.

You just need to identify why and what are the requirements. Also, you need to listen to news feeds regarding the features you are getting into and the features you will to use from it. Take the time to identify and understand.

• Open Source (It’s free)
• One can easily find help on the web

You can easily build data models both on-premise and on the cloud.

The work bench has some bugs that are mostly GUI related.

I have used this solution for three years.

I did not encounter any issues with stability.

I did not encounter any issues with scalability.

I use the community version. There are ample “Open Source” resources on the Internet.

We used Microsoft SQL and Postgres.

MySQL is an Open Source RDBMS, which means you keep your costs low, as long as you don’t need to have support and/or you have your own MySQL expert. However, MySQL also offers the enterprise edition for users that would like support and more advanced features.

When it comes to features, MySQL offers all the features of a RDBMS system, including monitoring tools, backup and recovery, high availability and easy migration from other databases.

For any web project today you are going to need a database system. If you use any Content Management System, MySQL is most of the times the database of your choice.

MySQL is easy to use, most developers have experience using it and it is an Open Source, cost-effective solution.

Although MySQL should cover most of the needs of an average user, there are constrains that need improvement.

For example, MySQL doesn’t support check constraints. MySQL’s performance is not optimal on subqueries and can significantly increase the server load for database intensive applications.

Another issue is the ineffective table manipulation during multiple transactions which result in implicit Commits.

Finally, since MySQL is now part of Oracle, and Oracle already sells their own databases, changes and bug fixes have significantly slowed down for obvious reasons. Oracle cannot improve MySQL too much, since it will then compete with their commercial database systems.

We have been using MySQL either through custom projects or through CMS, for more than 15 years now.

We haven’t encountered any serious stability issues with MySQL.

However, as with all systems, you need to keep your database “tidy”, making sure to optimize it, clean it and avoid corrupt files.

For critical projects, it may be wise to have redundancy by having two servers synced all the time.

Most scalability issues with MySQL can be simply resolved by adding more memory, optimizing settings or moving to a better server.

Of course, if you are talking about 40-50TB of data, or critical applications, then you will probably need to move to a more commercial database, such as Oracle.

We haven’t used the enterprise edition of MySQL, since most of our projects do not require such support levels. Most issues are handled by our developers.

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

Setting up MySQL is simple, however, optimizing it requires some experience which is also based on the demands of each customer.

When we started using MySQL, it was more or less the best Open Source RDBMS for web projects. Today, you have multiple options, such as PostgreSQL, SQLite and MariaDB, therefore the choice for a newcomer should be based on their project needs.

For us, MySQL is the choice for all of our projects. It is simply to use, supported by all content management systems and, of course, Open Source.

We haven’t had any major issues, and since we have now developed MySQL technical skills and custom libraries, there is no reason to move on with a different RDBMS, unless circumstances change.