We use MySQL in multiple projects for storing, task management apps, and dating apps.

MySQL is the best option for the Laravel PHP framework. It supports multiple model systems, and it's very easy to call MySQL compared to other languages like MongoDB. I prefer MySQL for the Laravel PHP framework.

The solution's security features depend on where we host our server and database. We have some preventive measures to reduce attacks. We have taken authentication and only allow a particular IP address.

In MySQL, we need to define every table beforehand.

I have been using MySQL for four to five years.

In MySQL, we need to define every table beforehand. However, we don't need to do so in MongoDB. We can add a new row or column in MongoDB anytime, making it much easier. If you purchase MongoDB's plan, it supports many security features, and you don't need to check about security. They will handle everything.

The solution’s initial setup is very easy. For the first time, the solution's implementation will take some time. However, you can use it multiple times after you configure it.

MySQL is a cheap solution.

Maintaining the database is a task. We take a weekly backup for each database so that we can upload it to the server if anything happens to the data. We created a cron job so that the data can be taken and then uploaded to a specific space so that we can go back to the particular big data whenever we want. I prefer MongoDB for scalability because it's much easier to maintain MongoDB.

Just one person is enough to maintain the solution. The solution has good documentation available on Google.

Overall, I rate the solution six and a half out of ten.

I use MySQL as a metadata database to store information about our product and transactions from other platforms. We extract and store these transactions daily.

I find MySQL's relational data storage format very useful for data management. Our structure is well-defined and easy for end users and business stakeholders to read. I appreciate the tool's simplicity and ability to integrate with our backend tools.

Performance optimization techniques in MySQL are foundational and very useful. Many big database tools are based on their techniques. We use basic optimization methods like indexes and constraints, which should be set up early when designing the database schema. These optimizations are important for us and work well with MySQL.

As for areas that could be improved, the tool is often used as a local database on laptops. But now, we're moving to cloud-based solutions that are more scalable and highly available. I think the tool should offer a cloud database option. This would let users keep a local copy of data if needed, but also have their data available across different regions through a cloud account. 

The product's stability is high. 

I rate the tool's scalability as about six out of ten. It's moderate since it's a relational database, so scalability depends on the data volume we can store. We use MySQL mainly for structured data in its final state. About 1800 people use MySQL in our organization. Around 1200 use it daily, and about 600 developers use it for local databases or small project tasks.

MySQL has been in the market for a long time, and its community keeps growing. As developers, we've gotten full support from them since we started using it. This includes help from their support team and software team and assistance with any technical issues we encounter.

Positive

I'd rate the initial setup as nine out of ten for ease, with ten being the easiest. It's very simple for beginners to set up because the documentation is thorough, and each step is well explained. The deployment usually takes minutes to hours, depending on the data volume we're putting into the database. It typically doesn't take longer than a day.

MySQL has had a moderate impact on our cost efficiency so far. We mainly use it for local development in our internal environments. For production, we use other cloud solutions. However, MySQL's impact on our operational productivity is significant. It's very reliable for all the solutions we're building.

I rate the solution's pricing as four out of ten, where one is cheap, and ten is expensive. For our basic needs, it's quite affordable. However, the cost increases when we need to scale up or require high availability. Our developer team of about 600 people uses MySQL without much issue. The pricing becomes more of a concern on the business side, as we have more end users and need constant database availability and scaling. In those cases, the solution gets a bit more expensive, even though it provides good value for the business.

I rate the overall solution a nine out of ten. 

I have worked on migration projects between Power BI on Microsoft and SAP modules, which involve exchanging databases from Power BI on Microsoft to SAP modules. 

Additionally, I have been involved in integration projects as a MySQL developer using Oracle SQL databases.

MySQL has facilitated the migration projects to SAP modules from Microsoft Power BI, easing database exchange. The integration is smoother and more efficient, which has been beneficial for handling various projects.

The ML modules in MySQL are advantageous since they make data handling easy and quick at MNQM. I have a lot of experience with QA test sections on MySQL, and it aids in connecting with third-party programs effortlessly due to its adaptation capabilities.

MySQL has some unique exchange problems when it comes to migration projects. The product could improve in terms of security, though not necessarily when compared to Azure. It can be improved in areas related to database exchange during migration projects.

I have five years of experience with MySQL.

MySQL is stable and continuously improves concerning databases. It is advantageous for projects in this area.

Scalability in MySQL involves unique troubleshooting for every project that differs according to database exchanges. You can solve scalability issues easily if you possess strong SQL skills.

Technical support from Oracle for MySQL is very good. They are really good at providing support.

Positive

I have experience with Oracle SQL and have not used Microsoft SQL. MySQL and PostgreSQL are the tools I currently work with.

The initial setup for MySQL took about one and a half hours, and only one person was required for the installation.

Cost-saving is not a significant concern, but focusing on project details is crucial. The project details provide exchangeable areas that can lead to cost savings.

The pricing for MySQL is slightly expensive, especially in unique projects for sectors like automotive and pharmaceuticals. Despite this, it is preferable for special projects due to its unique offerings.

I have experience with Oracle SQL and PostgreSQL.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

MySQL was open-source at the beginning until Oracle acquired it in 2010. I started working with MySQL because I was an Oracle expert, having worked for Oracle for eight years. That's why I added MySQL to my skills as an administrator. MySQL is a powerful database engine that is easy to install, manage, and work with. It's ideal for fast application deployment and is cost-effective as well.

MySQL is for metadata and data. My organization has used it to store data about hardware servers and their configurations, including network and storage configurations. MySQL is an RDBMS engine, so it can be used for any business application.

MySQL has a straightforward installation process, is lightweight, and easy to manage. Compared to its competitors, it is more accessible and user-friendly. While competitors like Oracle are known for their extensive features, they are often more complex to install, configure, and maintain, requiring experts to manage them, which can be costly. MySQL, now owned by Oracle, may not have the same feature set as Oracle's flagship database, but it is simple to install, manage, and cost-effective. MySQL is a viable option that can be enhanced with additional features, making it reliable for small to medium-scale applications and capable of effectively handling substantial amounts of data.

MySQL is now in a real application cluster. In terms of high availability, MySQL can be configured for active-active or as a real application cluster.

I have been using MySQL for ten years.

When MySQL is involved in the metadata, it never gets down. It's very stable.

It's secure. MySQL supports large databases that can contain nearly fifty million records. It also supports up to sixty-four indexes per table.

They provide 24/7 support. It provides faster resolution and identification.

Positive

It is very easy to install and takes an hour to complete.

I rate the initial setup a ten out of ten, where one is difficult and ten is easy.

It is open-source and supported by Oracle.

Oracle occupies it, so Oracle added more security features, such as password system improvements, host-based verification, and encryption, to the MySQL engine. It's developed and managed by a big company, and they keep adding new features.

I recommend another solution for large data, like billions of records. However, MySQL is a good option for data up to about fifty million records.

Overall, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.

Right now, I don't work very effectively with the tool. I am more like an architect currently, so I don't have to go deep into MySQL. In my company, we don't use Azure yet. Teamcenter PLM software is set up using Oracle or MySQL. We need to install Oracle or MySQL.

I used the tool for technical things for ten to twelve years. Right now, I have lost touch with how to use it.

The product is cost-effective, less expensive, and much faster, considering the way my company structures the data and the solution handled. The only thing is that if there are 10,000,000 or 20,000,000 records, it will slow down a bit. If the data is less, the performance is good. Once the data keeps on increasing, such as if we work with five terabytes of data and go up to nine terabytes of data, MySQL finds it difficult to handle the data. Huge amounts of data can only be managed by Oracle.

The performance issues in the product can be considered as an area where improvements are required.

I have experience with MySQL.

It is a stable solution. Stability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten. Once the data increases, the tool will face some issues.

Scalability-wise, the product works very well. I rate the solution's scalability an eight out of ten.

My company usually deals with big companies having a minimum of around 2,000 people.

I have not contacted the product's support team since everything is available on the internet.

I used Dropbox when it was initially introduced. I had put so many documents into Dropbox, but I stopped using it. It has been a long time since I have used the product. I had used the product when it was launched, and the tool was giving two GB or three GB for free.

The product's initial setup phase is very easy. I rate the initial setup phase a nine to ten out of ten.

My company uses MySQL's corporate licenses.

In terms of our organization's data management strategy, especially if I talk about PLM software, which is about data management and can be regarded as the core data management of the products that we make. When we are designing something, specifically a new product, it is a critical area, especially considering that I am in the energy sector. In the energy sector, when we are building huge turbines and other things, the data might have intellectual property aspects attached to it. Even within the company, one region cannot see other regions to the extent to which the product offers security. In my company, we use PDM and PLM from Teamcenter effectively.

MySQL is not a tool my company uses in production. When we create some small demos, we use MySQL. For production, we would use only Oracle because it is the most stable tool in the market.

When we install Teamcenter, we don't need to touch the database. We just need to make some references to figure out this is the database, and it automatically creates everything. The basic thing about PDM and PLM systems is that the user should never touch the database because people may corrupt the data model or do anything that will have a very bad impact on the system. Database modifications only have to be made to the PLM system. We are not supposed to interact with the database directly.

The tool is very lightweight, less expensive, and sometimes it is free. It is a very usable tool that is preferred by a lot of people. Only for production use, I may ask people not to use it.

Integration of MySQL is like how we don't directly integrate PLM with Oracle. We have to use PLM's APIs to talk to the database. As a part of the best practices, we should not directly integrate anything with the PLM database. Feature-wise, the integration capabilities of the product are easy to use. It is like any other tool where if there is a table, there is a property. If you want to map a property using any middleware, then we can easily do that.

I recommend the product to others. For medium-sized companies, MySQL is one of the best solutions. Medium-sized companies can choose not to go for Oracle, which is very expensive.

In terms of the value or benefits derived by our company from the use of the product, I would say that it is not very expensive and provides performance along with scalability. The product can cater to the needs of customers ranging from 2,00,000 to 6,00,000 to 10,00,000 records. Even 20,00,000 records are fine, but after that, users may get into trouble. It is the best tool for mid-sized companies with a reasonable amount of data.

I rate the tool an eight out of ten.