MySQL

It's very dependable. I know how to get it running and keep it running. I don't have to worry about it going down in the middle of the night.

For our needs it's fast. Every new version seems to run faster.

Easy. MySQL has been around for a long time. There is a ton of documentation and tools to make using it effortless.

Setting up replication takes some effort. It's not bad once you've done it, but I still need to reference the documentation every time I need to set up a new slave.

Oracle owning MySQL means that they don't put everything into the community edition because they want to sell licenses to their commercial editions.

Might not be the best performance at very large scales.

Well supported by mostly all languages.

Scales well IF it is configured properly. (A lot of people complain that it doesn't but it did quite well for most of the projects where we used it).

Easy to get up and running. Setting it up is breeze and with lots of third party software, it has become even better.

User management and administration is not as simple as it should be.

Caching and partitioning could be an issue.

Although it's possible to create PL/SQL procedures, it's not as good as other platforms such as Oracle.

Poor documentation.

Availability on the cloud.

Our familiarity with relational, and SQL.

Availability of guides and other learning resources on the internet to work with MySQL

I am guessing that for larger enterprise projects, we would probably need a paid edition. Eventually the cost evaluation would help us evaluate the features.

Querying

Reporting

Performance

Indexing of columns

Big data support

It's very easy to install and use. Once installed, we didn't have any issues and never had to reach out to our IT teams for support. The UI was very easy to use even for the first timer.

We have some complex queries for the data in our dashboard and it used to take a lot of time. The dashboard had a lag in showing the data. After migrating to MySQL, data was loading much faster on the UI because of MySQL.

There was an issue when using the MySQL UI and as most of the team is used to SQL developer, they pressed control and enter and it executed all the update statements that are there on that page instead of executing just that query, which is very annoying.

Quick deployment

Ease of use

Scalability

Performance

Full joins are not supported but you can emulate them

No check constraints

Easy to set up.

No heavy tuning needed.

Master-slave gives high availability.

Auto partitioning would be nice to have!

Unified storage engine (so user doesn't need to study different options.).

Stats report (similar to AWR in Oracle).

Ease of use. Very easy to learn to use as well as retrieve that data you need.

Cost. MySQL generally is cheaper than some of its competition.

Reliable. MySQL is generally more reliable and faster than some of our NoSQL databases such as Hadoop or Hive.

Can suffer for poor performance scaling. This doesn't effect us too much since the volume of data we store isn't too large.

There are some limitations that can be frustrating, mainly in the diagnostics.

I use sub-select to accomplish a complex query tasks.

I also like text searching in MySQL better than Oracle.

Updating data directly in the view is very convenient also.

In-clause with multiple fields like in Oracle would be helpful.

Full joins instead of left and right joins combined.

MySQL is open source and can be easily integrated in the application layer without much hassle of managing a large relational database.

MySQL performs well in the larger workload and provides multiple configurations for clustering and scalability.

Monitoring capability for MySQL instances and ability to integrate in one centralized console like Netcool.

Migrate MySQL database to Oracle - there may be room for improvement.

Migrate Oracle Database to MySQL database - they may be room for improvement.

Relational Schema

Support for all major programming languages

Open source

The CLI can be more intuitive to the users.

Rapid and easy deployment

Easy administration

Small footprint

I would like to see it more closely mimic some Oracle syntax

I would like it to more easily run as a completely in memory solution

Free.

Easy to use.

Easy to find professionals to support it.

Tools for performance tuning.

Support more data volumes.

Professional services in Chinese market.

It is incredibly simple to implement even across operating systems such as Windows and Linux.

It is very easy to configure and manage. Setting parameters and memory profiles is very straightforward, backups are simple, and stopping, starting, and deploying are very easy.

The different storage engines represent distinctive features sets and allow for flexible feature rich deployments within the same database.

It follows the more extended name space used by products such as SQL Server and Sybase. This namespace is more flexible.

MySQL simply doesn't scale as well as commercial databases. It seems to reach a performance plateau where you are then required to shard the data into different instances to get the performance you need.

The stored procedure and programming language is too limited compared to TSQL or PL/SQL.

Configuring the different storage engines is cumbersome to enable features like spatial queries. It would be helpful if all features could run out of the InnoDB storage engine.

It lacks some of the higher end features of commercial databases such as flashback recovery, updateable views, etc.

Shifting computations to the server-side and leveraging the power of the database engine made our application fast.

Our mysql databases were stable.

They were easy to manage in terms of user privileges, backups, etc.

At the time we built the CMS, we banned subqueries because they were so slow, however, their performance has been improved since then.

Help and Support - Being open sourced there is massive amount of help on the internet via a simple search. 99.99% of the time someone had exactly the same problem! - So this should help reduce, in a production environment, incident handling times . Likewise plenty of info for your development team to read up on to.

Easy to Setup - Out of the box a simple MySQL environment is just a few clicks of an install shield! It will run on any modern laptop and you may want to install a companion Apache / Tomcat and PHP software to give your dev people their local dev environments.

Scaleable - MySQL will scale to almost the largest data warehouses (assuming here you can a good db design and implementation). We have been using in a multi-node HA cluster with no problems.

Management and Development Tools - There are a number of good quality software tools that provided admin and development work spaces features. MySQL Workbench and TOAD for MySQL are good examples.

Software Cost - Depending upon what you are doing with MySQL the cost for the software licences will be nothing if your application is covered under the GPL licence. There will be technical support costs (if you choose to have these) but these are likely not to be as great as other DB platforms.

Training - If you have development staff experienced in SQL then they should be able to pick MySQL up with little training. Administration isn't the headache much larger DBs come with.

Works well with the following - Apache/Tomcat - Oracle Weblogic - JAVA, PHP, JSP, Perl.

Hardware Cost - When comparing against Oracle we found the costs for a MySQL cluster were less than an Oracle cluster (either an Oracle RAC and defiantly EXADATA environment).

Some of the bells and whistles of the larger DB solutions are missing. Examples of this include some types of table encryption, solutions like data vaulting, and utilisation of an entire disk for MySQL (not like some DBs that can do file/disk management instead of the OS e.g Oracles ASM). You will also find some types of index and certain forms of partitioning are missing. However you have to ask yourself how often you would use these features anyway!

PL/SQL - It is now possible to use/create PL/SQL procedures in MySQL but in my opinion this isn't as mature in terms as programming structures as Oracle PL/SQL.

Backups/Restore - Personally I am not a great fan of the backup/restore features built in to MySQL. I have found they can take a long long time to import/export a table with many many millions of rows of data.

Table Fields - We have had problems with MySQL to store large binary files (e.g. images/video ) and they are some quirky gotchas covering 'fulltext' searches and indexes that you have to be aware of. These are minor but important and annoying if you want to do something you can't!

The facility to integrate to various programming languages. We use many diffrent programming languages to implement our business, so we had to choose a database solution that could support these programming languages, or at least the most of them. MySQL supports all programming languages used on our company and makes the integration very easy.

The flexibility. MySQL is very flexible in many ways. As we have a lot of different data types and our service demands fast data processing, with MySQL we were able to configure it to optimize our process, and of course, customized it to do the best for our company according to our needs.

With our experience, we felt the lack of a tool to make easier the administration of data in MySQL. The tools provided today are good, but very poor for some features and functions that demand some specificity or complexity.

High availability. Replication is easy to set up and easy to troubleshoot.

MySQL makes it easy to automate installations.

There are great support tools available for MySQL.

MySQL's user management leaves a lot to be desired. I wish it had some of the roles and features that competitors have.

MySQL is on its way to support more and more NoSQL operations and products. I would like to see more of that.

Secure - Provides solid security layers and protects sensitive data from intruders

It's free or very inexpensive - Important for small companies.

Memory efficient - I haven't run into cases where the server runs out of memory.

Speed - It works well with big tables as well

Scalability - MySQL becomes slow as read/write ratio on the database grows.

Reliability - I have run into some stability issues. Could be a problem for certain use cases.

Slow development - I haven't seen a lot of new releases in the last couple of years

Replication: Setting up Mysql replication is fairly easy. Replication is robust and stable and with Mysql 5.7, new features will allow to take replication to another level. (Multi-source)

Configuration: Mysql allows to configure some "variables" live without restarting the server.

Scales: Mysql can scale pretty well if properly configured and architected in the application eco-system.

Optimizing queries can be challenging. Having a tool to trace some queries could be useful.

Roles: Adding support for user role would be useful. Currently done via "proxy" i believe but it seems a little tricky.

Cost: MySQL is still available for free. If you have a server, you can set up a MySQL server quickly at no cost.

Ease of use: Oracle, SQL Server, Vertica and other large players have a steep learning curve to administer. MySQL is less complex. For a quick and easy database, very little knowledge is needed. MySQL is mature and has a vast knowledge base. With the right people, MySQL can become a very scalable solution for many enterprise applications.

Maturity: MySQL is a mature software package. It has been used on countless applications. It is a very popular pick for web applications as well as installed and SaaS applications. MySQL is clearly not a fad. It is a mature database offering.

Clustering: MySQL does have some clustering options. None of these compare to RAC from Oracle. Each instance of MySQL requires its own data store, this can become costly. Further, in extremely heavy write environments, the replication between the servers can become backed up, this is a difficult problem to correct, and often severely impacts performance.

Features: With money comes features. Big name databases such as Oracle and SQL Server have plan caching, robust partitioning, RAC(Oracle), robust optimization and support. Adding Oracle or even third party support to MySQL can be very expensive. This would put an enterprise in the position to consider Oracle or another solution.

Misunderstanding: This is not necessarily a flaw in MySQL, however in my career I have seen a lot of it. MySQL is a complex database solution. It is not to be taken more lightly than other database products. A bad design from an inexperienced engineer can take a low cost start up application to a high cost emergency as it scales. Architecture, proper query writing, thoughtful indexing and design are paramount to the success of any application. MySQL is no different. I have seen many companies make the mistake of starting with inexperienced engineers and rush a product to market. This may be low cost, or in some cases no cost. When the product matures and volumes increase, problems, sometimes big present themselves.

Runs Fast

No bugs

Multiple Databases

Some lagging time

Slower while running multiple queries

Nothing else

Performance is better as I found read and writer operations better than MS SQL.

It is kind of an open-source so the community version is free.

More companies are using MySQL.

I think MySQL still has room to improve when comes to growing the read/write operation ratio.

MySQL tools are not robust and good as the MS SQL management tool. It is probably because a lot of them are free.

After Oracle owned this product, there have't been major improvements.

MySQL is very easy to install, and thanks to a bevy of third-party tools that can be added to the database, setting up an implementation is a relatively simple task. In addition, it’s also an easy database to work with.

The general apprehension was that Oracle would change the device into a shut, restrictive environment. Thankfully, however Oracle has fixed its hold on MySQL to some degree, it can even now be viewed as an open-source database choice, as the code is still accessible for nothing on the web.

Despite the fact that MySQL's ubiquity has wound down to some degree as of late, it stays a standout amongst the most-utilized database frameworks as a part of the world.

It Suffers From Relatively Poor Performance Scaling

As anyone might expect, MySQL isn't intended to do everything (nor if it be). The database isn't completely SQL-consistent, and has a tendency to be restricted in ranges including information warehousing, adaptation to non-critical failure, and execution diagnostics (among others).

MySQL does not support check constraints.

MySQL does not support a very large database size as efficiently.

MySQL is very easy to install.

There are many third-party tools that can be added to the environment.

Cost can be low for storing data.

Scaling can become a problem and can affect performance.

A basic version of MySQL doesn't come with partitioning.

MySQL isn't 100% SQL-compliant, like SQL Server is.