We performed a comparison between MYSQL and SQL Server based on our users’ reviews in four categories. After reading the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: SQL Server comes out ahead in this comparison because it is less demanding on resources and can more easily be integrated with other solutions. Some users feel that MySQL requires more maintenance and can be a bit buggy and less stable than SQL Server.
"It has a remote access feature to manage the database from a remote location. This enables in-work collaboration."
"The solution is great for small applications in particular."
"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."
"I use MySQL for employee service in an OLTP database."
"Table partitioning is most valuable. It is easy to use."
"When comparing MySQL to other solutions it is easier to use and boots up faster. Additionally, when you want to query a lot of data, MySQL is better in performance."
"The product is flexible and easy to use."
"MySQL has cross-platform support for multiple operating systems. The backups on a Linux machine can be restored on a Windows machine, and vice versa."
"In Poland, SQL Server is the most popular database engine, and overall, our customers like it."
"One of the most valuable features of SQL Server is that it's easy to use."
"It is a typical database solution, and it is working well so far. It is easy to use, and it is also very common and popular, which makes it easy to find a support partner."
"It's a good option for those that have a lot of Microsoft solutions in use."
"SQL Server is easy to manage."
"SSAS is the most interesting feature to organize the data and let the users play with it."
"SQL Server has good performance. It is one of the best features."
"Most valuable features include: high availability, clustering, save backup and recovery."
"I find the Microsoft solution a bit better. But mostly in terms of the UI layout, I would say. I just find it a little bit more efficient."
"Its performance should be better. When we use big data, it is slow in performance. We should be able to use mirroring for improved performance."
"There should be more tools to manage the on-premises version and more automation features."
"The workbench could be improved. In particular, error messages can be improved, which are horrific and completely unhelpful. I'd like to see improved parsing of errors. When you write SQL and it crashes, it usually is something completely irrelevant and not helpful. I've started to use GPT 3.5 for finding out how to do things. I got to do something a bit different, and that I found to be very useful. If there was some way to tie it into one of the new AI tools, that would probably be a good idea."
"I feel that some tools which make it easier to create queries or make it easier for other functions would be really interesting to see."
"MySQL could be improved by adding more automation."
"Improvements to MySQL depend on the specific use case. For example, in my scenario, I frequently need to maintain and store data, which can then be utilized to generate reports. On the other hand, others may suggest incorporating a feature that allows for easier visualization of the data, such as what is available in Power BI or other similar tools."
"It could be a little bit simpler to use."
"The security features of the solution could be better."
"The product overall would benefit from the addition of better tutorials to help master the skills necessary to actually build a project database. Right now, what is available isn't sufficient."
"The performance is not always the best."
"I have experience working with SQL Server 2016 and older versions, including handling JSON data. Initially, I found the JSON capabilities to be less helpful, but over time, they have greatly improved. SQL Server now offers extensive capabilities for working with various forms of data, particularly when communicating with text, such as in JSON format. I particularly prefer working with these features on Azure, as it provides numerous possibilities, especially in the field of business intelligence (BI). Additionally, the serverless platform offered by Azure is highly beneficial and makes tasks easier to manage."
"The interface integration could be better."
"Sometimes, the tool doesn't support all the native features, and because of this, our company has to customize it to meet our requirements, which is a challenging process for our company's engineers."
"SQL could be improved by making all features available on the on-premise version of the product as well as the cloud version. When you buy the on-premise version, it's sort of an inferior product compared to the cloud version, which seems to get most of the latest and greatest features."
"The solution could be more secure."
MySQL is ranked 4th in Relational Databases Tools with 142 reviews while SQL Server is ranked 1st in Relational Databases Tools with 260 reviews. MySQL is rated 8.2, while SQL Server is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of MySQL writes "Good beginner base but it should have better support for backups". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SQL Server writes "Easy to use and provides good speed and data recovery". MySQL is most compared with Firebird SQL, PostgreSQL, MariaDB, Teradata and Oracle Database, whereas SQL Server is most compared with MariaDB, SAP HANA, Oracle Database, LocalDB and Vertica. See our MySQL vs. SQL Server report.
See our list of best Relational Databases Tools vendors.
We monitor all Relational Databases Tools reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.