We compared SQL Azure and Google Cloud SQL based on our user's reviews in several parameters.
User feedback on SQL Azure highlights its fair pricing structure, seamless integration with Microsoft products, and satisfactory customer service. On the other hand, Google Cloud SQL users appreciate its scalability, ease of use, and efficient customer support. Areas for improvement in SQL Azure include enhancing query performance and reducing costs, while Google Cloud SQL users seek better performance optimization and transparent pricing models. Overall, both products offer reliable database management solutions with their unique strengths and weaknesses.
Features: SQL Azure stands out for its seamless integration with other Microsoft products, scalability, and flexibility in deployment options. On the other hand, Google Cloud SQL is praised for its ease of use, high performance, excellent backup and restoration capabilities, and automated maintenance tools.
Pricing and ROI: The setup cost for SQL Azure is deemed reasonable by users, ensuring a smooth and hassle-free experience. On the other hand, Google Cloud SQL's setup cost is well-managed, ensuring a smooth and hassle-free process. There is no mention of specific differences in the setup cost between the two products., In terms of ROI, SQL Azure received positive and satisfactory feedback from users, while Google Cloud SQL users shared their experiences and outcomes.
Room for Improvement: SQL Azure has room for improvement in the areas of query performance, storage capacity, availability, customization options, and cost reduction. Users also want improved security features and integration with other Azure services. Google Cloud SQL users have suggested enhancements in performance optimization, scalability, availability, monitoring, and management tools. They also recommended more transparent pricing models and improved documentation and support resources.
Deployment and customer support: Based on user feedback, the duration required for deployment, setup, and implementation for SQL Azure is inconsistent. Some users report separate timeframes for deployment and setup, while others view them as the same period. On the other hand, Google Cloud SQL users have varying experiences, with some separating deployment and setup durations, and others considering them as one., SQL Azure has been praised for its highly satisfactory customer service, with users commending the responsiveness, efficiency, and knowledge of the support team. Google Cloud SQL also receives positive feedback for its prompt assistance and efficient issue resolution, with users appreciating the friendly nature of the customer service representatives.
The summary above is based on 45 interviews we conducted recently with SQL Azure and Google Cloud SQL users. To access the review's full transcripts, download our report.
"It supports different databases, like Postgres and MySQL."
"The initial setup is straightforward."
"Its most valuable feature is that it's scalable. I can start off with a base of a lot of data and move as much as I want and it's the same as if asked to do a lot of infrastructure changes."
"My suggestion to anyone thinking about this solution is to jump into it head-first!"
"It's SQL. SQL is so easy if you know something about databases. It's easy to learn."
"The valuable feature of Google Cloud SQL is its high availability option. The product is stable."
"This is a stable solution and offers good performance."
"What I like the most about Google Cloud SQL is that it handles the management, which allows us to concentrate on our applications."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is that our customers do not have to manage the solution."
"Its cost benefit is most valuable because you are charged per data unit instead of licensing. You can easily migrate your on-premise SQL to the cloud with a managed instance. That's what it is designed to do. It is easy to take your on-premise or older SQL instance and move it to the cloud. It makes it easy to get off your on-premise SQL and start utilizing the cost benefit of the cloud."
"I am very happy with this solution; right now, I don't think there is anything I would change."
"I prefer using Microsoft SQL Server because I like the experience and the way Microsoft handles the query tuning and security."
"The most valuable feature of SQL Azure is centralized authentication because I'm using the domain, user name, and password, for Microsoft 365 account with multifactor authentication and the security has been working well."
"Its performance is good. It has a lot of features. It has the backup feature, which is not there in Amazon RDS. In Azure SQL, there is an option to replicate and restore a database point to point, whereas we can't do that with Amazon RDS."
"The reason we moved to the cloud was for the convenience of not having any physical hardware to maintain."
"The main advantage of it is that there is no infrastructure cost. We don't have to host it here. So, there is no infrastructure cost."
"The only thing that could be better is the pricing."
"I would like to see better availability of the product in different regions. It should also improve the security with encryption."
"Google's technical support is good, but they tend to never reopen a case and to send us snippets from the publicly available documentation. It's not as helpful as you would expect, not just for Google Cloud SQL but for all of Google Cloud products."
"The most vulnerable problem with Google SQL is that while you can customize your access control list, it provides you with a public IP address."
"The most challenging part is dealing with legacy data from your old systems and migrating it into the new setup, but once you've completed the data migration, it becomes quite convenient to use."
"The customer support should be improved."
"For data analysis, the AI area of the product has certain shortcomings where improvements are required."
"I would like to see better integration with all the different tools on the platform."
"It can have more dashboards for monitoring, which would naturally help a lot. Other than that, everything is okay."
"The preset configuration switches we can select on SQL Azure should be made more liberal to work on."
"I haven't explored SQL Azure's features much, but I would like to see some better integration with Python."
"Their support is nice but their responses aren't effective."
"I feel that the price is high and it could be reduced."
"If the product could support applications requiring an SQL server for installation, by using SQL Azure as a backend, that would be useful."
"I would like to see the cloud connectivity environment improved."
"There is probably more functionality in our on-prem SQL Server than SQL Azure."
Google Cloud SQL is ranked 5th in Database as a Service with 16 reviews while SQL Azure is ranked 2nd in Database as a Service with 90 reviews. Google Cloud SQL is rated 8.4, while SQL Azure is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Google Cloud SQL writes "An easy-to-use solution with good features and functionality ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SQL Azure writes "The SQL connector effectively syncs data to databases". Google Cloud SQL is most compared with Amazon RDS, MongoDB Atlas, Oracle Database as a Service, Google Cloud Spanner and Oracle Exadata Cloud at Customer, whereas SQL Azure is most compared with Amazon RDS, MongoDB Atlas, Oracle Database as a Service, Google Cloud Spanner and IBM Db2 on Cloud. See our Google Cloud SQL vs. SQL Azure report.
See our list of best Database as a Service vendors.
We monitor all Database as a Service 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.
