We performed a comparison between CockroachDB and SQL Server based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Relational Databases Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The product has valuable security features."
"The most valuable features of the solution are its resiliency features and the geo-partitioning capabilities."
"The availability and the easy to use feature is the most valuable. The documentation is also good."
"The tool's most valuable feature is node syncing, which takes only 0.54 milliseconds."
"The best feature of CockroachDB is the ability to keep the nodes in different locations."
"CockroachDB is highly reliable."
"The subset of SQL that my client is using is completely supported."
"I use CockroachDB to test big data samples and to create the best structure for databases. We have four users and required 10 people for deployment and maintenance."
"Technical support is very good."
"The solution is easy to use and provides similar features to other competitors."
"The solution is valuable because it seamlessly extracts reports and enables the collection of information from different tables."
"If backups and alerts are configured properly, I can also rely on my restoration plan."
"I have found SQL Server easy to use."
"The most valuable feature is easy installation. It was very easy to install."
"I would say that it is a stable product."
"The installation is pretty straightforward."
"The product must improve its disaster recovery features."
"The platform could be more extensible."
"We are looking for more features to support distributed high availability and geo-partitioning."
"Cockroach does not support all types of protocols. I need to improve it myself to support a CouchDB on my network."
"I find the serverless offer a bit confusing."
"The initial setup and pricing could be improved."
"CockroachDB needs to improve store processes."
"The closer they can make CockroachDB to being completely compatible with Postgres, the better. It's almost compatible, but not completely. If it was, it would be nice to just be able to use Postgres libraries without any fiddling."
"The solution’s pricing and integration could be improved."
"The number of concurrent users is too limited and other databases are better than SQL in this regard."
"The tool's support needs to be improved."
"CAL licenses should cost less. Microsoft usually prices high for client access licenses. Server plus user client access license (CAL) licensing requires a separate Server license for each server on which the software is installed, plus a user CAL for each user accessing the server."
"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 solution needs to be more secure. It's lacking, compared to, for example, Oracle."
"The scalability and the high availability feature can be expanded or improved. Currently, there is a limitation on scalability. A feature similar to the Oracle Diagnostic feature can be included to provide a better user experience."
"The free version of SQL Server is time-limited before updating to the paid version."
CockroachDB is ranked 10th in Relational Databases Tools with 10 reviews while SQL Server is ranked 1st in Relational Databases Tools with 260 reviews. CockroachDB is rated 8.0, while SQL Server is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of CockroachDB writes "Open source with extensive documentation and a University for training". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SQL Server writes "Easy to use and provides good speed and data recovery". CockroachDB is most compared with Oracle Database, MySQL, Citus Data, Amazon Aurora and MariaDB, whereas SQL Server is most compared with MariaDB, SAP HANA, Oracle Database, LocalDB and SAP Adaptive Server Enterprise. See our CockroachDB 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.