MySQL Reviews

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.

Installation, because in a few seconds, the product was up and running.

It was the first step of the Service Desk.

ITIL implementation:

GLPI has a poor ITIL implementation in the sense that not all ITIL processes are implemented, e.g., no Service Catalog is present.

I've used this solution for two years.

Yes, several unexplained crashes caused dissatisfaction from users.

Yes.

Zero. No support at all. Only forums with no response.

I have not used a solution like this before.

Straightforward.

It was open source and license-free.

Yes, but commercial ones (ManageEngine, EasyVista, Remedyforce).

Not choosing an open source software for this kind of solution. Now, we are looking at ServiceNow Express.

Simple syntax and simple administration are the most valuable features.

It allows us to maintain very large tables without jumping through the hoops that are required by the commercial products such as Oracle.

Multi-master replication could be a bit more reliable.

Counting the earlier versions, we are using this solution for over ten years.

Compared to the other database solutions, there were no stability issues as such.

Sharding is relatively straightforward.

We run the Community version, so technical support doesn't apply.

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

We looked at Oracle and PostgreSQL.

The multiple engine replication is the most valuable feature. This neuralgic process for billing needs high availability and that is where we need this robust, but simple solution. If one server fails, we switch to the other transparently.

It facilitated fast processing of the millions of records for billing of the the call detail records in the Telecom company. The company needed to recover calls, in addition to immediately detecting frauds in the telephone calls so as to block the line and generate large losses. With the help of stored procedures, functions and triggers, we created an engine to recover most of the calls with a single transaction. Thanks to MySQL.

There were no stability issues.

There were no scalability issues.

I would rate the technical support as a five out of 10.

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

The setup was easy.

MySQL is very flexible, has excellent performance, and it's simple to use.

Once we needed to use a database to distribute a product for my company and we chose MySQL, it was easy to use and it is very small, but powerful.

Maybe the way to build clusters needs to be improved. They could also improve the installation process.

I been using MySQL for nearly seven years.

There were no stability issues.

There were some scalability issues.

I would give the technical support an eight out of 10 rating.

We did upgrade the version with improvements to the product.

The setup was complex in the cluster installation.

MySQL is one of the best database options. The Community version is great.

We used Oracle and SQL Server, but their prices and licensing were so expensive.

Using MySQL could be an excellent option for you.

The most valuable features are:

• MySQL Database Servers

• MySQL Connectors

• MySQL Workbench.

MySQL has improved our internal procedures by providing high performance, ease of use, and cost savings.

Security in the data files needs manipulation.

I have used this solution for five years.

There were no stability issues.

There were no scalability issues.

Technical support is excellent.

The setup was really straightforward.

According to the specific business and technical requirements, you can choose your MySQL Edition that you wish by consulting the official site.

We looked at the Microsoft SQL Server.

It can benefit any business by a straightforward way of implementing and using it.

This product is valuable because it is used in production environments. Online backup can be implemented by activating a temporary storage similar to the Oracle's flash recovery area and introducing Percona innobackupex. This is possible from version 5.6.

It permits services such as data warehouse and retail.

The online backup needs to improve.

I have used this solution for 15 years.

We did encounter stability issues.

There were no scalability issues.

Not applicable because we don't purchase commercial support.

We switched due to cost saving reasons.

The setup was of medium-level complexity due to memory parameters.

Compared to PostgreSQL, it has an online backup feature only with the extension of Percona innobackupex.

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.