You do realize how many major (aka Top 1000) websites are powered by MySQL don't you? It's easy to dismiss MySQL if you're stuck with experience from <5.x, but the latest versions are actually quite good. I still prefer Postgres for many things, but MySQL definitely doesn't deserve to be cringe worthy anymore, imho.

So you "cringe on" Wikipedia?

Good point. Still, MySQL in 2016, almost 2017 :)

I think the point is: if it's able to handle the data needs of one of the largest sites in the world do you really need to worry about it not being able to handle a pet app?

It is obviously up to the task.

I don't think thats a good point. I mean I can probably make a console application using .txt file on disk as the database and scale it to handle large websites.... if I had spent $100M on servers and 10 years of my life. Almost anything is possible with most of the technologies out there. But its about using the right tool for the job.

Stackoverflow is huge, its built with SQL server. If they had for example used mysql they would probably have had to hire 2x engineers + spent twice as much time tuning and tweaking.

All those top1000 mysql sites are heavily customized and tweaked to perform as well as they do. Using other modern technologies may had saved them 1000 of hours and money.

You can't bash on a technology by pulling numbers out of your ass and calling it a day.

It sounds like you've been drinking a lot of kool-aide and haven't given MySQL any real thought.

Please do suggest an alternative technology rather than just sneering at them for using MySQL.

I'm confused by this comment. My understanding is that MySQL is a respected and powerful relational database used in millions of projects because it's feature-rich, reasonably perfomant, and stable. Am I wrong?