MySQL Reviews

It is open source and AWS provides a managed solution.

Amazon has come up with Aurora, a MySQL hybrid that has helped us get up to speed without actually thinking about MySQL underlying optimizations.

Catching up with proprietary technologies like Oracle and PostgreSQL is the challenge right now.

We have used this solution for over four years.

There have been no stability issues yet.

We code for horizontal scaling and hence the only thing that becomes important is the number of connections. The data can be easily replicated in real time on Amazon replicas themselves. We have a dynamic solution to read data from replicas and not from a master instance. That is how we scale.

I would give technical support a rating of 10/10.

We did not use a different solution before.

The initial setup was straightforward.

Keeping something similar to AWS, and as easy as Amazon, will be the best thing for any small business like mine.

I did evaluate other solutions, but MySQL stood out because of its ease of use. Perhaps my prior experience has made me be biased towards MySQL.

Until you have expertise in data migrations and what you are doing with data, MySQL can be really easy and dangerous at the same time. MySQL doesn't give you a warning about data truncation if data types don't fully match. Be really careful on that front.

SQL capability, functions and ease of optimization.

Software and web development.

15 years.

No issues.

No issues.

Manageable.

Used open source and never needed customer service.

The product is quite mature.

NA

Straightforward.

In-house.

Good.

The open source product is good. If you want advanced features go for the enterprise edition.

The EER diagram is the most important feature for me as the EER diagram can show the inner picture of the database, such as the relationship between the tables very easily. We can also add, modify or delete EER diagrams very easily.

The user friendly interface which is easy to interact with such as creating backups, tables, views, and the EER model.

It has lot of options to interact with. Sometimes it is hard to find the appropriate options quickly. They need to add descriptions somewhere as to where a user can go to find the proper menu easily when required. Another problem is that since all the databases can be seen and operated together, it’s possible to make mistakes such as dropping the wrong database.

I have used this product for two years.

There was no issue with deployment

There were no issues with stability

There was no issue with scalability

The level of customer service is good. I understand sometimes they need to transfer the service to a knowledgeable person, so we need to have patience and explain the same problem several times.

The level of technical services is good. I understand the product is technical, so sometimes the reported problem requires more investigation.

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

The initial setup is very straightforward. I didn’t face any problem at all.

I did the installation.

This product is good as it is a graphical interface. It's easy to do all MySQL database administration very easily. You just need to play around to be more familiar with it. The MySQL Workbench interface is well prepared to design a database including EER diagram, create table, and view very easily. The EER diagram allows the user to completely understand the database design, which is very important and useful for the people who are involved with the database. It’s easy to understand the inner picture of the database from the EER model.

This product’s most valuable feature to me is active-active (multi-master) cluster support for MySQL.

We have been using the multi-master solution from the Percona cluster. It seems to work as expected.

We use it as an embedded component of a solution we sell. It has provided a low-cost, high-availability solution without complex active/standby management using Linux HA.

It should provide detailed debugging with transaction IDs at the application level to understand deadlocks, especially under bursty workloads.

It should also provide partitioned tables and a clustered index, like Oracle, to take advantage of inherent parallelisms in the application domain.

It does not scale well when there are concurrent requests. Making changes to binlog and transaction log settings improves scalability at the cost of reliability.

It has decent support.

This product’s active-active cluster feature was the reason for choosing it.

One of the reasons PostgreSQL was not considered – a decision taken before I joined the company - was its lack of mature multi-master cluster support. It also lacked other popular ports (e.g. MariaDB, Percona, etc. in MySQL).

Ensure that it meets your scaling needs, and has features for handling parallelism in the application.

MySQL database is the database on which we run JD Edwards. You could run it on Unix or you could run it on Oracle or something else. Our choice was to run it on MySQL because of the availability of resources in our area. There are more MySQL database resources available around Houston than there would be those that are familiar with, say, Oracle Database.

The availability of resources for MySQL has been the biggest benefit for our organization.

I'd like to see Oracle provide more certification for it.

We've had no issues with deployment.

It's pretty rock solid and we've had no issues with instability.

We're able to scale without issues.

I cannot tell you when the last time was that I had to call about support for MySQL. It's really rock solid.

Choose your database based upon your ability to be able to hire people and support the product, like supporting JD Edwards with a MySQL database. Not everyone can work one database with JD Edwards as well as they can another one. So just make sure you've got the compatibility and skill-set.

I couldn't name just one most valuable feature. You can use it under different cases, but most of the time I needed the database as a part of my project. I think, in one moment you will prefer the InnoDB database, so you can store and execute procedures and roll-backs.

Again, I couldn't name an positive aspect precisely. Maybe, the fact that using MySQL and Java gives it a big portability and, at the same time, short time responses within your product (my case). This could come from the DB side. It also allows for easiness of finding interaction tools with MySQL.

None that I can name. At the moment I worked with MySQL, there was nothing I couldn't do with the product.

I've been using it for four to five years.

There were no issues with the deployment.

It's a pretty stable product for what I needed it to do.

There have been no issues scaling it.

Being a community product, you can find solutions all over the internet. It's not a specific support department.

There was no solution in use previously.

It was quite easy. The product comes with an installer. It can be complicated to configure the MySQL server, but with a little attention, all goes well.

It was done in-house.

It's free.

It helped me within my projects. For a free product, it works very well and it's easy to use and configure.

Don't try the most sophisticated products, that have big names, and cost a ton. Just try this product if you need something cheap and reliable. I don't think it will disappoint, at least not in my case.

• Privileges
• Command line

I don't have any as this was my first time using it.

I think it is where it needs to be. MySql PaaS. But, you do need to have experience with SQL to use it.

I've used it for 12 months.

There were no issues deploying it.

It has been perfectly stable for us.

We've been able to scale it without issue.

4/10

7/10

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

It was a straightforward set-up.

We used an in-house team.

We also looked at Microsoft SQL Server.

Experience with SQL is vital. It is simple to learn and use.