MySQL Reviews

We are using MySQL for backend operations since we are a software backend developer. We are using this tool in our backend application for acquiring the data.

We mainly use MySQL for our Relational Database Management System(RDBMS). We are maintaining our customer data in a defined way. We have to create various schema levels. We are presenting the customer data, such as name, mobile number, what was purchased, and what they like or dislike. Once we create the schema, a set of data, we need to maintain the unique constraints.

For example, for customers, we'll assign a unique ID to each record, that will be a primary key. All these SQL constraints we'll use and there should no variance or replication of data isolated. When we perform any update operations, it should not affect any of the data isolated. 

We need to take care of many things, such as consistency, isolation, and variability for constructing any database. There are a few more concepts as well, such as normalization and PL/SQL. For example, if I want to run a job at a particular time, the product will use PL/SQL. We are like implementing our coding skills to databases.

Our operations are on-premise. However, we are in the process of moving everything to the cloud.

We have many repositories in one table that we are completing for customers' data that are store product data. There are various pieces of data and data should be in the same format. For this purpose, we are using RDBMS. The data in the repository should be able to be accessed in one place which is Oracle SQL Developer. MySQL can store data for a longer duration as compared to other data solutions, such as MariaDB, which can only store data for one day. MySQL can store data for a longer period of time, and we can have primary and secondary data as well for backup purposes.

MySQL is easy to use, has fast performance, and it is comfortable for end-user to use. The schema level and structure we are using are very simple and easy to understand. Additionally, packaging tool development is straightforward and the data is presented in a way that is very simple to understand.

MySQL can improve some of its functions. However, it is dependent on the use case. For example, if we are having multiple database connections in this tool, and we are performing one operation in one database, it takes a lot of time due to the reason we are selecting and processing the data. When we have a lot of data it takes a longer time. The transaction gets stuck in a queue and if we try to stop that particular transaction, it won't abort until all the selected records have been processed. This sometimes can be a lot of time and it can hold up our live processing of transactions. This product should be able to handle multiple processing at a time.

In an upcoming release, there should be something added similar to EPL. For example, when using the flow diagram, we can create a schema. We have two useful features to add or create the table, but there should be some UI features to allow us to drag and drop to create other schemas. This would be very helpful.

I have been using MySQL for approximately four years.

I have found the development tools to be highly stable in MySQL.

The scalability of MySQL is very good. There are no barriers to it. It can be used and accommodated in any particular language. We can use it with Java and Python.

We have almost everyone in my organization using the solution. We have developers and support teams all using it. If my organization has 1,000 people, almost 900 people out of them were using the service.

I have evaluated MariaDB.

We use a solution called Jenkins to help us with all the pipelines. The pipelines are all created and configured in the Jenkins. We are in a distributed server architecture and the full process can take approximately 20 minutes for one server.

If we have a large amount of data we have to take care of it. If this particular data is not used over the years, we have to make maintenance decisions on it after we use it. The developer administrator and the team will be responsible.

We are using the licensed version of MySQL.

I would advise others that this is a useful tool.

I rate MySQL an eight out of ten.

Our primary use case for MySQL is for running applications on our Linux boxes. We have very few applications that run online, but we use MySQL on those boxes, primarily for our email system. We haven't considered working on cloud, so all our solutions are on-premises. 

One of the most valuable features is MySQL's ability to run our email system. We use a system called Colab. 

MySQL could be improved by adding more automation. There are no additional features I would like to see that I can think of at the moment. 

I have been using MySQL for a few years. 

This product is stable. I'm very satisfied with the performance. 

Since MySQL is running our email system, there are around 200 users. It's installed on one of the servers and the admins are the ones who interact with the system itself if the need arises. 

I have never contacted Oracle's technical support. If we have any issues, we've got some recommended support people here in Zimbabwe that we contact. 

I didn't use any other solution before implementing MySQL. We also use MariaDB, but not on a very big scale.

The installation was a very straightforward process. It took about a day and we did it ourselves. 

We implemented through an in-house team. One person, the admin, can handle it. 

We are using the free version of MySQL. We prefer paying for a yearly license. 

I rate this solution an eight out of ten. I would recommend this solution to others and I'm very satisfied with its performance. 

The solution is primarily used for mobile applications and IoT-based services. It's a good choice for development. 

The solution is very stable.

The scalability has been great.

The deployment process is pretty fast.

It would be ideal if the solution had more references available in terms of helping me find answers to issues or problems. When I run into issues, I really have to research how to fix them. 

The installation process could be better.

I would like the product to have even better stability and scalability.

I've been using the solution for a couple of years.

The solution is very stable. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It's reliable. 

The solution is scalable. If a company needs to expand it, it can do so. It's easy.

We have 500 users on the solution at this time. We are likely to increase usage in the future. 

We don't really have access to technical support. Our engineers have to spend time looking for answers on Google. 

Previously, we only used Oracle databases, which were expensive. We've moved away to other DBs and have begun to use MySQL.

The installation process didn't take very long. It took about three or four hours.

We have five people, who are engineers, that can handle setup and maintenance tasks. 

I handled the implementation myself. I did not need the assistance of any integrators or consultants. 

You do need a license in order to use MySQL.

The solution can be deployed both on the cloud and on-premises. 

I'd rate the solution at an eight out of ten.

I would recommend the solution to other users and organizations. 

We're on a software development team. We develop applications.

We're currently running version 5.7 of MySQL, and we are going to be upgrading to version 8 this year.

MySQL server currently is in a co-location center. We've got a hosting provider that takes care of that for us. We are looking at moving it into AWS, but that won't happen this year. We do have a smaller MySQL RDS instance in AWS right now, but it is pretty minimal. 

It is free, which is probably its most valuable feature. It is a pretty full-featured relational database. It really does everything we need it to do. 

The availability of tools could be improved in the MySQL open-source platform. They can provide more analytical tools. I haven't had any particularly difficult issues to troubleshoot on MySQL, but in the past, on Microsoft SQL Server, I had to troubleshoot some difficult issues, and better tools were in place to see what was going on in real-time on the server. So, that's the bit that is lacking on the MySQL open-source platform.

I have been using MySQL for seven years in my current company, and I have probably used it for another two or three years in a previous company.

It is very stable.

I haven't dealt with them.

We're using the open-source version right now, which is free. I do see some value in some of the more enterprise functions. We're using the open-source version right now, and I was interested in the MySQL Enterprise version really for the tools that they provide, but we decided not to make the purchase.

There are certain things that it doesn't do as well as SQL Server. There are certain things that you can do to swamp the server, such as it is just not very responsive to more complicated joins and things like that. Unfortunately, you have to try to learn what those things are, but there are certain things like correlated sub-queries and more complicated approaches that it doesn't support, and you can hang the server in doing that. So, even though it has standardized the SQL queries and other things, there are some things that it doesn't perform particularly well, such as more complicated joined scenarios. We join several tables at a time, but we tend to do that on well-known indices, primary keys, and things like that, but if you're doing something more sophisticated than that, it becomes more challenging. These things that I've mentioned are written up by people, and once you learn those things, you develop techniques to work around them. You take different approaches to solve the problem for those things. You have to do that anyway as a developer. You don't just write code and throw it out there on a production server. You certainly need a totally separate test environment and all that.

I would rate MySQL an eight out of 10.

I like the simplistic view of MySQL to build custom queries and things like that as compared to SQL Server, which seems more cluttered.

SQL Server has a query analyzer. MySQL pretty much does the same, and performance-wise, it has less overhead for connecting to our ERP system. It seems more responsive and cleaner. With MySQL, you get what you need without any overbloating, for which Microsoft is known. That's why they have so many constant security patches for everything because there is so much stuff, which degrades performance.

The GUI interface probably can be improved. Let us say I want to see the relationships in the database. In the query analyzer, I would like to go and drop the tables and create relationships between the tables. I haven't found a feature like that in MySQL. It was a shortcoming even in SQL Server.

MySQL can have more performance monitoring tools. I know Google has these tools, but within MySQL, there are not that many tools to monitor things like performance and database locking. They might be in there, and I might not be familiar enough to know where they are. I am a pretty new user of MySQL.

I have been using MySQL for three months.

It has very good stability. We haven't had any issues with it.

It has good scalability. You can use the Google interface to build it on the cloud. If you start noticing performance issues or you see it taking up memory or resources, you can add another processor. It is pretty easy to do. Right now, we are in beta. We haven't rolled it out completely to the people.

I haven't had to use their technical support. They have plenty of online resources. If you have any problem, you can just search for it and find the answer. Somewhere, someone has done it before.

The ERP company that we work with is moving away from SQL to MySQL. From my understanding, it is because of the cost. MySQL is also more streamlined and gives them what they need. 

Even though I am a SQL Server person, MySQL has come a long way from what it used to be. They have made great strides. It seems like Google is moving more and more to it. In Google Data Studio, which gives you an interface to build dashboards, when you try and connect to new resources, you will notice they prefer MySQL on the cloud or a private server. Google is leaning more towards the MySQL side of things, and they make it very easy. It is a lot more work trying to connect to SQL Server. MySQL seems to be the preferred cloud database that people are going for.

The initial setup was straightforward. MYSQL installation has fewer options than a SQL Server installation, which has endless options. MySQL installation is more straightforward and streamlined. It doesn't have a lot of extra features. It is just a database. It is a database engine that gives you what you need, and I like it.

I am doing one installation right now on Google Cloud. I am building an instance of MySQL. It is just more simplistic. It is more to the point and what you need. In SQL Server, you need to dive into the endless options, and you use maybe 60% of what is there. There is a lot of stuff that people don't use, which you end up uninstalling because it affects the server performance, and it is a service that you are not even using. There is a full install as well as a custom install with SQL Server. If you go for the full install, it throws everything into the server, and you start noticing performance issues. Then you realize that there are services that you are not even using. Some places don't even use analytics or reporting services.

Microsoft licensing for SQL Server is probably ten times more expensive. I used to work for the government, and I remember when we were looking into upgrading to the enterprise version of SQL Server 2019, the licensing was going to cost 350,000. To get the equivalent in the cloud, it was going to be about four grand to get the same processing power and everything else. With MySQL, it was going to be about 300 for the same licensing. 

Cost-wise, for sure, there is a huge difference. Would you prefer to pay 300 a month or 3,000 to have the same amount of data resources? You might lose a few options that you need, but it isn't worth the price difference.

If you want just a database for data storage, I would recommend MySQL. If you want something that has everything in it, such as reporting services and analytics, SQL Server might be better. Cost-wise, MySQL is almost pricing itself out.

I would rate MySQL an eight out of ten for ease of use, especially for someone who has never used it and implemented it. It was pretty straightforward to implement it. It gives you what you need. It surely provides the basics such as data storage, setting up the tables, etc.

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.