IT Manager at ducart
Real User
Scalable, stable and easy to use for a host of applications
Pros and Cons
  • "The solution can be used for a host of applications."
  • "The maintenance and tasks should be improved so as to reduce database files."

What is our primary use case?

The solution can be used for a host of applications.

What needs improvement?

The maintenance and tasks should be improved so as to reduce database files.

The complexity of the database should also be reduced, so that its size can be diminished. 

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been using SQL Server for around ten years. 

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

The solution from the 2008 version is stable. I like the defined database and the ease with which it can be used and that enquiries can be made. 

Buyer's Guide
SQL Server
March 2024
Learn what your peers think about SQL Server. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: March 2024.
765,234 professionals have used our research since 2012.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

I believe the solution to be scalable and plan to increase our usage. 

How was the initial setup?

Installation is relatively easy, although I do not recall how long it took. 

What about the implementation team?

We made use of an integrator.

There is not much technical team required for the deployment and maintenance. It consists solely of engineers.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

The licensing is on an annual basis. 

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

Prior to going with SQL Server I utilized the Oracle Database.

What other advice do I have?

There are around 15 people making use of the solution in our organization. Every computer processing unit has its own license. 

I would recommend the solution to other users. 

I rate SQL Server as an eight out of ten. 

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

On-premises
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
PeerSpot user
Technical Director at Progetti e Soluzioni
Real User
Great integration with extensive documentation and a good community for support purposes
Pros and Cons
  • "We've found it to basically be pretty problem-free."
  • "The interface could be updated to make it slightly more user-friendly."

What is our primary use case?

We primarily use the solution for recording transactions and information related to the reservation of a service. 

What is most valuable?

The product is very stable.

It offers very good documentation. When there are some little issues, it's always very easy to go into the documentation for troubleshooting purposes. There's just so much documentation on hand and a really great community around the product that is very helpful.

It's a very complete product.

We've found it to basically be pretty problem-free.

The integration with other products has always been quite good.

The security of the product has never given us any issues.

What needs improvement?

We're quite satisfied with the solution. There aren't any outstanding features we would like to add.

The interface could be updated to make it slightly more user-friendly.

For how long have I used the solution?

We've been using the solution for more than ten years. It's been a while. It's been more than a decade at this point.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

The solution is very stable. there are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. it's excellent.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

We haven't really scaled the solution all that much. At the moment, we have measured the scalability in a horizontal way. When we needed to have more installation and more capacity, we split the database into a different SQL Server instance.

In the future, we'll likely need to consider scalability more. We are also moving in the last two years, also to a different architecture from a monolithic to a more microservice architecture. Maybe the scalability can be more easily handled in the applications that are talking to each other and leaving the database out of the equation.

While end-users are hard to quantify, I can say that likely half a million users have come through our system for transactions.

In the near future, we will continue to use the solution. We might use it for the next four or five years, although it is hard to say.

How are customer service and technical support?

We've always been able to rely on the fantastic documentation and great community around the product in order to troubleshoot problems. It's very easy to fix issues as they arise due to the public knowledge available to everyone.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

We've mostly always used this solution. Last quarter, we moved a little bit to a NoSQL database. We have done a little experiment on Cassandra however, previously, it has always been on SQL Server.

We're considering moving away from the solution right now and trying something new. The owner of the company wants to experiment with other technologies and see what is out there, which is why there is talk of change. However, it's not a reflection on this product, which has been largely quite good.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup is not overly difficult. It's pretty straightforward. A company shouldn't have any issues with the process.

We have 12 technical people on our team that can handle the implementation.

What other advice do I have?

The last version we used is 2015 if I'm not mistaken. We don't jump immediately to the latest version due to the fact that, usually, we look for stability. We make the move to the next version in case of some integration or limitation. We prefer not to move onto something that might have bugs or glitches that need to be patched. It's more secure for us that way. 

I'd recommend the solution to other companies.

I'd rate the solution at a ten out of ten. It's doing exactly what we need it to do. We've very happy with it.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

On-premises
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
PeerSpot user
Buyer's Guide
SQL Server
March 2024
Learn what your peers think about SQL Server. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: March 2024.
765,234 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Sr. DBA/Developer at a financial services firm with 5,001-10,000 employees
Real User
Stable with good scalability potential and very easy to manage
Pros and Cons
  • "SQL is very easy to manage."
  • "Occasionally the performance, as good as it is, is a bit off. We sometimes experience memory spiking. If they could maybe fix that aspect of the solution, that would be quite helpful for our organization."

What is our primary use case?

We primarily use the solution for our daily operations.

How has it helped my organization?

The solution has provided our clients with some valuable data feeds.

What is most valuable?

The performance is a very valuable aspect of the solution.

SQL is very easy to manage.

What needs improvement?

Occasionally the performance, as good as it is, is a bit off. We sometimes experience memory spiking. If they could maybe fix that aspect of the solution, that would be quite helpful for our organization.

For how long have I used the solution?

We've been using the solution for more than ten years at this point.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

The solution is extremely stable. We haven't had issues. We don't really experience bugs or glitches and haven't had the system crash on us before.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

The scalability of the solution is very good. A company that needs to expand should be able to do so fairly easily.

We have about ten people using SQL at our organization. Some are in Operations. Some are developers.

The data we have is constantly expanding and growing for us, so we already are increasing the capacity of the SQL server. We'll continue to do so as necessary.

How are customer service and technical support?

If we have any issues, we contact Microsoft. We only do so if something happens and we can't fix it ourselves. It hasn't happened too many times, and it usually doesn't revert to me to reach out, so although I know we have used them in the past, I myself have no direct experience dealing with them.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

It's been about ten years since we started using SQL, which is quite a long time. I don't recall if we used a different solution before that or not. If we did, I don't know what it would have been.

How was the initial setup?

I'm not sure how to answer as to if the solution is straightforward or complex in terms of setup. I didn't handle the deployment, so I'm not the person who would be best equipped to answer these types of questions.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

I'm not the person that deals with billing and payments, so I don't know what the cost of the solution is, or if it is monthly or yearly billing. 

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

I'm not sure if we would have looked at something else or what it might have been. If there was research and a comparison was done, that would have been a decade ago. It's been a long time. 

What other advice do I have?

We are using the 2008 and 2017 versions.

I'd like others to know that SQL is easy to use and easy to manage. It also offers pretty good performance, in my opinion.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten. It's not too expensive, or at least that is my understanding, but I am aware there are lots of open source options out there as well companies may want to consider.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

Hybrid Cloud
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
PeerSpot user
Systems Specialist at Zillione Technology
Real User
Has good replication, availability, and clustering features
Pros and Cons
  • "Its availability for a secured server is one of its most valuable features. Also its replications - we can manage eight replicas. Their clustering and availability groups are also valuable."
  • "They do not offer the SQL Server Management tool via the installation. It is a separate tool I use when I'm trying to configure the mirroring with SQL Server Mirroring. This is not supported and I'm getting some errors on the database mirroring."

What is our primary use case?

Mainly, I do infrastructure support. We do fine-tuning, information, configuration, higher-level availability, and replication. Also, single and clustering solutions - both kinds.

We do on-premises and cloud deployments. This is because some customers use Microsoft Azure, mainly in the financial sector, such as the Sri Lanka Government, who has many databases that cannot go on the cloud. The financial sector also works with on-prem databases.

I am mainly using the SQL Server from 2019. That's the latest version since last January while our customers are mainly using the 2016 and 2017 versions. This is because we are not providing the latest version. We are testing some bugs now. In terms of functionality, I think the 2017 version is better. I have not fully tested the 2019, so I cannot give a recommendation for it.

What is most valuable?

Its availability for a secured server is one of its most valuable features. Also its replication features are valuable- we can manage eight replicas. Their clustering and availability groups are also valuable.

What needs improvement?

They do not offer the SQL Server Management tool via the installation. It is a separate tool I use when I'm trying to configure the mirroring with SQL Server Mirroring. This is not supported and I'm getting some errors on the database mirroring. So sometimes I use the 2014 management console and the 2017 server for that. If the customer does not agree to that, I use a query for the database mirroring connections.

Additionally, I think some kind of machine learning related feature should be included. This is because technology is moving fast and all of the customers are getting it easier. So developers are making machine learning products. That's why they should include some kind of a machine learning feature here, too.

How was the initial setup?

Which initial setup are you referring too? It has multiple solutions and installations, some of which are very simple. Clustering is very difficult to setup.

Setup time depends on the customer's environment, including database size, the number of databases, and the amount of data. Last week I did a PLC with two databases and one availability crew. It took two days because one day I did clustering. It can be done in one day but the customer provides another day for that.

Also, because the customers haven't kept some downtime, we request some kind of downtime for the primary server. So sometimes we plan downtime when we need some days for the complete environment.

What about the implementation team?

I'm working with Microsoft solutions in Sri Lanka. We have a technical team for the DB side only - Microsoft SQL Servers, Azure platform, SQL servers. All of those have a security device. And as I mentioned, installation is per requirement. There is no need for a couple of engineers for that.

In terms of maintenance after the deployment, it also varies depending on the number of databases.

What other advice do I have?

On a scale of one to ten, I would rate Microsoft MDS an eight. I'd give it an 8 and not a 10 because it lacks some features, such as machine learning.

Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: Partner
PeerSpot user
PeerSpot user
Senior Developer at a tech vendor with 201-500 employees
Vendor
Gives me the ability to mold a process flow or modularly add in new structures
Pros and Cons
  • "Without any doubt the Integration Services and Analysis Services are the most widely used. These are the basis for data quality, data gathering, ETL process, as well as collation for the data warehouse, Cube-generation, and ad-hoc processes. The ease in which you may mold a process flow or even modularly add in new structures is something which is much needed in my job."
  • "An area for improvement would be the SQL Server process monitoring, which is quite basic and could sustain more information."
  • "The only item which I can list is application failure during Integration Services debugging, when restarting a process flow. In a number of instances the solutions fails. I have not given this much thought and simply stop and start the debugging service rather than restarting."

How has it helped my organization?

In the current organisation there was no centralised data repository. Thus, statistics, reporting, and generic management information were not existent. With the introduction of SQL Server, we have consolidated relevant business data into one main repository. We built reporting structures and analytics on top of the repository to help analysts and teams manage themselves, as well as provide management information. From basic or incomplete reports and statistics, we moved to a full reporting data structure, providing a holistic view of the organisation's data.

What is most valuable?

Without any doubt the Integration Services and Analysis Services are the most widely used. These are the basis for data quality, data gathering, ETL process, as well as collation for the data warehouse, Cube-generation, and ad-hoc processes. The ease in which you may mold a process flow or even modularly add in new structures is something which is much needed in my job.

What needs improvement?

An area that definitely needs improvement is the Reporting Service side with the actual report server. Although to be fair, Microsoft has developed a new branch of tools for reporting; presumably that is why they have not improved the Reporting Service side. Nevertheless, if this was not the case then, yes, it would be an area for improvement. Another area would be the SQL Server process monitoring, which is quite basic and could sustain more information.

For how long have I used the solution?

One to three years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

Overall, SQL Server 2014 is a very stable product and so far I cannot remember major issues that I have encountered. The only item which I can list is application failure during Integration Services debugging, when restarting a process flow. In a number of instances the solutions fails. I have not given this much thought and simply stop and start the debugging service rather than restarting.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

So far, we have had no scalability issues. I have read about instances where people encounter issues online, but fortunately enough I have never encountered issues.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

Yes, in the past I have worked with different versions of SQL server and have switched due to upgrades to utilise the latest version. I have also used Oracle, Tableau, SAP, and Jaspersoft.

The main reason I went for SQL Server is because it felt easier and more adaptive. Also, most of the products we use within the organisation are Microsoft-based, so that provided an extra advantage over the rest.

How was the initial setup?

Not too complex. We had spent a number of months on the design and planning stages, deciding how we would go about the setup, security, and accessibility aspects, so that when it came time for the actual setup, the process looked pretty straightforward. Don't get me wrong, it still took a number of days to finalise, but we had a concrete plan of action, the steps needed, and the work was delegated accordingly.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

My advice is quite straightforward. If you know the number of users who really and truly need access to the Server then it is a no-brainer. If you do not know, then get the basic package and minimum licenses and start from there. Needless to say, users can develop/use data structures outside and then deploy onto the Server.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

Within the current organisation, we did not look at other options. I was pretty confident that the product would do the job, based on my previous experience with similar products. One key factor which pushed us to choose SQL Server was the cost of the product versus the amount of work to develop/maintain.

What other advice do I have?

I rate it eight out of 10. It is quite a good product and has improved dramatically. Like all products, it has bugs here and there and some areas still need improvement.

I have been using the solution for the past two and half years, however, I have worked with older versions of SQL Server (2012, 2008, 2005). The solution is quite powerful and versatile and I have not yet used all the areas/modules of the solution. It is not always easy to utilise all the available modules for the solution, especially if your work is focused solely on a particular area. Nonetheless, I try to use different areas for side projects.

Plan thoroughly before, and once implemented go through the structure regularly and remodel accordingly. When planning, go through all the various sections, resources, accessibility, security etc.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
PeerSpot user
PeerSpot user
Founder & Principal Architect at a tech services company with 1,001-5,000 employees
Consultant
The best-ever SQL Server release - again

Microsoft’s flagship database engine, SQL Server, keeps getting better with every release. The SQL Server 2014 platform is the best-ever SQL Server release, and is packed full of features for organizations of all sizes.

Every organization has different requirements for data. Vendors might specify a particular product or platform for their software. In-house development staff might be geared towards one platform over others. Management might have their preferences. SQL Server might not be right for all shops out there, but I can state that it provides the same scalability, flexibility, and raw power of other DBMS platforms on the market, and does it with the easiest to manage suite of features that I encounter. I enjoy this product and the technical community that has grown up around this product so much that I have dedicated this portion of my career to the mastery of SQL Server as a database and architecture consultant. SQL Server 2014 continues the platform’s evolution towards the future, and I continue to stand by it.

The core database engine is one of the easiest portions of the product to administer via the included SQL Server Management Studio tool. Quite a few of the SQL Server installations that I encounter in the wild are installed by non-DBAs who just click through the installation wizard and stand up their required SQL Server instances. This simplicity is one of the product’s double-edged swords, because even though it is trivial to install, non-DBAs tend to skip the best practices around infrastructure architecture, installation, post-installation configuration, and ongoing management that helps the product to really shine.

The Enterprise edition contains an updated and enhanced feature called AlwaysOn, and it allows for the simple setup of highly available databases so that the data is available if a server fails. It also plays a double role in allowing for the setup of disaster recovery database servers so that if an entire datacenter fails, applications can continue to work with only a minor interruption in service (usually measured in seconds). Failover and failback are trivial, and a single interface is all that is required to manage the entire setup. I love this feature, and as my clients are starting to migrate to SQL Server 2012 and SQL Server 2014, see a tremendous increase in AlwaysOn adoption at the moment.

The other huge feature is with In-Memory OLTP, or codename Hekaton. It is in-memory extensions that allow an application to begin to use memory to dramatically improve the performance of an application with only minor modifications to the app code.

Other features included in the core engine and licenses editions of the production include:

  • Backup encryption to make things more secure
  • Resource governance to keep high trafficked databases from being ‘noisy neighbors’ to other application databases
  • Data and backup encryption
  • Finely tuned security levels, based on your organization’s requirements
  • Integration Services - that includes a graphical means to transport, load, and transform data
  • Analysis Services – build data warehouses and cubes to help you gain serious insight into your business trends
  • PowerPivot for Excel to allow your end users to manage and transform the data that they require for decision support processes
  • Reporting Services – grant your users the ability to run and schedule their own reports in a simple to use management interface
  • Report Builder – advanced end users can construct their own reports, and even their own queries with the ‘model’ of the data that you present to them

SQL Server also now has the ability to move data into and out of the public cloud with ease through backing up to Microsoft’s Azure platform.

If you currently have SQL Servers in your organization, run – don’t walk – to SQL Server 2014. If you have some of the other database platforms on the market, consider migrating to SQL Server so you can reduce licensing costs, improve scalability while reducing complexity, and increase the number of database that a single DBA can individually manage.

Pros: Tremendous scalability. Easy to use and manage. Blur High Availability and Disaster Recovery with AlwaysOn Database Availability Groups. Business intelligence tools increases business insight into data.

Cons: The licensing has persisted the per-core model, and as a result the cost for the platform stays higher than expected. Adding software assurance, which I consider a must for virtualizing SQL Server, also drives up the cost.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
PeerSpot user
Independent Consultant at Unaikui
Real User
Top 5
Enables us to have continuous integration with high uptime
Pros and Cons
  • "The stability is fine, especially if you're hosting it on AWS or Azure. You can get up to 99.99% stability on AWS."
  • "Support could be improved."

What is our primary use case?

We use the solution for continuous integration, including CI/CD integration.

What needs improvement?

Support could be improved.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been using SQL Server since 1992. I’ve used AWS and Azure for two and three years, respectively.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

The stability is fine, especially if you're hosting it on AWS or Azure. You can get up to 99.99% stability on AWS.

I rate the solution’s stability an eight out of ten.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

You can scale to any extent. You need to increase your EC2 or your app server.

Six team sites with 50 users each are using this solution.

How are customer service and support?

Sometimes the response time was high.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup is straightforward. Depending on the complexity, setting up the infrastructure can take a while. You can work on MVP. To deploy on AWS, select SQL Server along with several calls and CPU.

What about the implementation team?

The solution was deployed in-house.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

You receive other products, like free usage, depending on the number of product shares.

What other advice do I have?

You can use a Cloudflare or web application layer that controls security. Furthermore, you can implement SQL reverse proxy practices for in-house environments and beyond.

To ensure the security of my SQL server, we typically set up a configuration where an API communicates with the SQL Server, and there's a front-end interface. This setup prevents direct access to the database.

Four people are required for the solution’s maintenance, but it depends on the complexity of the solution. You can put one senior and three trainees.

Overall, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

On-premises
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Flag as inappropriate
PeerSpot user
Advisory Software Engineer at a tech services company with 1,001-5,000 employees
Real User
Gives you all the basic requirements and can be integrated with other applications
Pros and Cons
  • "The solution has a user-friendly environment and supporting functionalities. It also has great memory and processing databases."
  • "Other than Synapse and the other version of SQL Server, they face some problems while processing the data."

What is our primary use case?

Our use case is creating data warehouses using the SQL Server database.

The solution is deployed on-premises and on public and private clouds.

What is most valuable?

The solution has a user-friendly environment and supporting functionalities. It also has great memory and processing databases.

What needs improvement?

Other than Synapse and the other version of SQL Server, they face some problems while processing the data. For example, the one issue we face is that when we need to process the queue, it's costly with Azure and SQL Servers. We also face some memory issues with that.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been using this solution for more than eight years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

The solution is very stable.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

The solution is scalable.

How are customer service and support?

We have a different technical team that deals with issues. So we only communicate the issue to them, and they communicate with the team.

How was the initial setup?

Setup is very easy, especially compared to Oracle.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

Synapse is a bit costly. If I compare it with different databases, I think it's a reasonable price. If I'm talking about licensing of the Oracle, it seems that normal organizations have it and some smaller organizations can also afford it, which is a good thing.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

I have also evaluated Oracle.

What other advice do I have?

I would rate this solution 8 out of 10. 

I always recommend SQL Server. To whoever asks me, I will say, "Just go for it." The databases are good. In terms of pricing, SQL Server is good. In terms of functionality, it gives you all the basic requirements. You can also integrate it with different applications, which is an advantage.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

On-premises
Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: partner
PeerSpot user
Buyer's Guide
Download our free SQL Server Report and get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions.
Updated: March 2024
Product Categories
Relational Databases Tools
Buyer's Guide
Download our free SQL Server Report and get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions.