We performed a comparison between SQL Server and Vertica based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, Oracle, SAP and others in Relational Databases Tools."The solution is user-friendly, is a robust tool and is always reliable to users."
"SQL Server's most valuable features are that it is a large number of community resources to help you out. that's one, and then it is quite powerful."
"SQL Server is quite stable. And now we are using the Lattice 2017 version."
"The support from Microsoft has been good."
"SQL Server is very good, it can be used as a transactional database and used to support the data warehouse. Additionally, the ANSI-compliant satisfies our database properties."
"The installation is really easy."
"The solution seems to be pretty flexible."
"Since we can automate most of our tasks, it means that the management is very easy."
"We are also opening new areas of business and potential new revenue streams using Vertica's analytic functions, most notably geospatial, where we are able to run billions of comparisons of lat/long point locations against polygon and point/radius locations in seconds. "
"The Vertica architecture means it can process/ingest data in parallel to reporting and analyzing because of its in-memory Write-Optimized Storage sitting alongside the analytics optimized Read-Optimized Storage."
"The most valuable feature of Vertica is the unmatchable database performance."
"Partition and join back to node are easy and simple for DBAs."
"The solution has great capabilities. The tool that instructs the internal database forward is easy to use and is very powerful."
"For me, It's performance, scalability, low cost, and it's integrated into enterprise and big data environments."
"I enjoy the cybersecurity and backup features."
"Vertica is easy to use and provides really high performance, stability, and scalability."
"There should be more tools and documentation for tuning the performance of Microsoft SQL Server. It would be nice to have more tools for tuning because currently, all the tuning that we have to do with our databases is almost manual. We have to read a bunch of knowledge base articles, and this information should be better documented. Its free text search should also be improved. It is quite important for us. Currently, we're developing our own free text search because of the lacking flexibility in Microsoft SQL Server. Therefore, we're kind of using elastic search and making different implementations in order to reach our targets. Using just the native free text search of Microsoft SQL Server is not enough for us. It should have more flexible features as compared to the current version."
"Technical support could be faster."
"The price could be better. It costs a lot, and competing databases like Postgres are free."
"The backup capacity needs to be bigger."
"Performance could be improved. There could be more support to PHP-based websites and to providing direct plugins for connections, and the related services or application services could be improved."
"The way to make cursors and manage raw data in rows can be improved. Currently, the way to construct or build these cursors is very hard, and you can waste memory. You need a highly skilled person to make it more efficient. It can also have support for Cubes, which is the organization of data in different dimensions by using MDX languages."
"Technical support could be better."
"The agility of the non-SQL-based features is relevant on the market."
"The integration with AI has room for improvement."
"If you do not utilize the tuning tools like projections, encoding, partitions, and statistics, then performance and scalability will suffer."
"I think they need an easy client so that you can write queries easily, but it's not necessarily a weak point. I think some users would need them."
"Documentation has become much better, but can always use some improvement."
"We are looking for a cheaper deployment for the solution. Although we did a lot of benchmarks, like Redshift. We tried Redshift, it didn't work. It didn't work out for us as well."
"Limitations in group by projections is where I would like to see an improvement."
"In my opinion, Vertica's documentation could be improved. Currently, there is not enough documentation available to gain a comprehensive understanding of the platform."
"Whatever's out, the core is not always as great as the engine, especially their first version."
SQL Server is ranked 1st in Relational Databases Tools with 260 reviews while Vertica is ranked 4th in Data Warehouse with 83 reviews. SQL Server is rated 8.4, while Vertica is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of SQL Server writes "Easy to use and provides good speed and data recovery". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Vertica writes " A user-friendly tool that needs to improve its documentation part". SQL Server is most compared with MariaDB, SAP HANA, Oracle Database, LocalDB and IBM Informix, whereas Vertica is most compared with Snowflake, Amazon Redshift, Teradata, BigQuery and Oracle Exadata.
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.