MySQL Reviews

We use MySQL to manage business intelligence reports by linking them with Oracle database and Power BI. 

I like MySQL's feature that helps to automate things. 

The solution is expensive. 

I have been using the product for five years. 

I would rate MySQL's stability a ten out of ten. 

My company has two users for the solution. 

We have not contacted support until now. We have an onboarding manual. 

The tool's installation is not complex but you need to have experience to set it up. You need to download the solution and pay for it. The installation can be done within an hour. 

You need to pay upgrade costs every year. 

I would rate MySQL a nine out of ten. 

We have used the solution to manage database administration and custom attributes.

The solution has all the essential features. We can manipulate bulk data, clean up data, divide it into compartments, and optimize it.

There should be a training platform for the solution without the complexities of owning a server partition in our system.

I rate the solution's stability a ten.

It is a scalable solution. We have 1200 solution users in our organization.

The solution's initial setup was straightforward.

I rate the solution as a ten. I advise others to have durable resources to handle the operations of MySQL systems.

The most valuable feature of MySQL is auto-scaling.

The GUI could improve to make MySQL better.

I have been using MySQL for approximately four years.

The stability of MySQL is good.

MySQL can scale well.

I have used the support and level three support is great.

The initial setup of MySQL was straightforward.

We have not seen a return on investment.

The price of the solution is good because we have a good partner.

The solution is good at scaling.

I rate MySQL a ten out of ten.

Our primary use case for this solution is a home database of payments.

The feature I found most valuable is activity performance.

This solution needs to be improved when it comes to working with desktop applications on the developer side.

I have about 15 years of experience with MySQL.

My impression of the stability of this solution is that it is quite good.

My impression of the scalability of this solution is that it is standard. However, scalability depends on enterprise size and legacy product compatibility.

My impression is that their technical support is good.

My impression is that the initial setup is pretty standard. Some parts of it can be difficult. We had a tough time with the administration and database.

Overall, I would rate this solution an eight, on a scale from one to 10, with one being the worst and 10 being the best.

We use MySQL for storing data on the web server. It is a competitor of Apache. The solution can also be used for analytics, warehousing, and Big Data.

The tool is open-source and there is no cost involved in its use.

I would like to see some improvements in the solution’s integration aspects.

I have been using MySQL for ten years.

We have optimized and stabilized the solution over a period of eight to six months.

There are around 60 plus users for the tool in our company.

There is a 25 member team involved in the tool’s maintenance and deployment.

I would rate the solution a seven out of ten. The solution’s users have the liberty of custom management. We can implement the solution in Azure, which is Microsoft’s advanced version.

We primarily use the solution for NDB and CG clusters.

The solution has made it easier for us to support our clients in India for a government technology project relating to CG clusters.

The IO segregation in CGE is valuable.

The auto-tuning and NDB cluster has some limitations regarding foreign keys. For example, when creating a partition with shared architecture data, the foreign keys do not work properly. Additionally, whenever we are working with this solution, as our projects are carried out globally, the size of the database is getting used fast. In case of replication and data access with two multiple sites or nodes to become a cluster, you need two separate data storage for accessing the same data from the two nodes. Hence, this consumes a lot of storage space.

We have been using the solution for five years and we are currently using version 8.0.31.

The solution is stable.

The solution is scalable, but I can configure this product with two nodes in case of a rack, but it is impossible in any of the databases. Therefore, I rate it a seven out of ten.

We do not have experience with customer service and support.

The initial setup is straightforward and it took less than twenty minutes. I rate it a nine out of ten.

One person is required for deployment.

I rate the solution an eight out of ten. The solution is good but auto-tuning and the NDB cluster can be improved.

I'm using it to create a small database for a project that I'm working on.

The easy access to the data and the ability to sort the data with multiple methods are very valuable features.

It's quite easy to grasp and is really well documented, which are huge plus points.

Sometimes, I get lost in the toggles and buttons, and a better visual design would be nice. The layout is not user-friendly or efficient.

I would like to be able to sort the data easily without having to do a request to get the table out of the database into the web page. At present, I can't do it directly inside MySQL; I have to do a request and print out my request into a web page.

The stability is really good. I haven't had any issues with it.

The scalability is good.

The initial setup is easy.

I learned to use it in class, and the setup was quite fast because the teacher really helped us to gain access and take the first few steps. The setup took a few hours at most.

I installed it myself.

I use a free version at present.

Plan how the data will be constructed. I had to delete an entire database and start over because I didn't organize it properly. That was a huge block.

I would rate MySQL at eight on a scale from one to ten.

We're using MySQL for data warehousing and logging.

Even for the best database, we always want the database to perform much better, so we wish MySQL would be much better, in terms of performance. When they release a new version, they mostly concentrate on scalability and performance.

I've been using MySQL for seven years.

The stability of MySQL is good.

MySQL is a fully scalable product.

The initial setup of MySQL was easy and straightforward. You can complete the initial setup for this product within a few hours.

It was the technical team who did the setup for MySQL. We had two or three engineers who took care of the deployment and maintenance of this product.

MySQL is very cheap. In fact, it could be free. They also have a yearly licensing option. I don't remember paying for additional costs, aside from the standard licensing fee.

I evaluated Oracle Database.

I'm using the Enterprise version of MySQL.

MySQL is a good database. We are using it, and we'll continue to use it.

I've never contacted the technical support team for MySQL. I have no complaints.

I can recommend MySQL to others who plan to start implementing it.

We don't ask for new features on a database. When we take a database, we take it because of fixed features, e.g. its current features. It's not an application. It's a database. We are fine with whatever features MySQL offers now. We never really thought about whether we want more features on this product.

I'm rating MySQL an eight out of ten.