SQL Server Reviews

The Microsoft SQL Server is a great and powerful data storage capable to provide many functionalities starts on free version until the power with BI resource and mirroring.

MS SQL is a recognized data tool, it provides many ways to help us organize data and process information.

MS SQL need to improve the big data functions and also own market share.

since 1999

few problems

no

i didn't use it like admin, i don't know.

great product

Oracle, some times i used others solutions, but working by compatibility.

easy.

never calculate.

according you need

It's a database that we use for our commercial applications, and our ERP sits on it.

SQL Server is definitely easy to use, and with the volume that we have, it's also stable.  Maintenance is much easier compared to other products. I may not be comfortable with Oracle because I don't have much experience with it. But in this case, SQL Server is much better for me. 

Performance could be better. But I don't know if it's a problem with my application or with my database. Maybe it can have the capability, but I may not be using it to the extent that it could be used, or the configuration is not as per the standard.

I've been using SQL Server for over ten years.

SQL Server is a stable solution.

The initial setup is very easy.

I implemented this solution by myself.

I would recommend this solution to potential users. If they have their own in-house team, they can manage it very easily. Microsoft is always easy to manage. It's a product where no expert is required for its maintenance.

On a scale from one to ten, I would give SQL Server a seven.

Its speed and the ease of server management are valuable. If I compare Microsoft SQL Server to MySQL, what I like in Microsoft SQL Server is the speed. We are using Microsoft Management Studio for managing our Microsoft SQL Server, and the user interface that I get to work with is also better.

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.

I have been using this solution for more than 15 years. Our clients are using its multiple versions, starting from SQL Server 2012.

It is stable.

In general, it is scalable, but we are only using the single-server mode. We are not using any kind of clustering. Therefore, I cannot say anything from my personal experience about the scalability of Microsoft SQL Server.

I do not have any experience with Microsoft support. We either use in-house knowledge professionals or third-parties for consulting services.

Its initial setup is quite straightforward. A major upgrade is a bit more complicated. We had some issues with the upgrade.

I would recommend this solution. It is a good choice in terms of price and quality.

I would rate Microsoft SQL Server an eight out of ten.

• Net integration is best for me
• Better optimizer
• Ease of use (admin tools)

We used this to solve many complex problems.

Overall, trying to make over with Oracle, it can be improved in usage for high data migration companies of large scale.

I have experience using both the versions of SQL Server 2008, 2012 for more than two years.

Never had issues with stability, may be we were handling structured data well.

No, federal vs clusters approach explains you well that you can search for them.

Technical support rating would be around a seven and a half out of 10.

Setup is easy as what we want the database to do for our problems, compared to Oracle latest versions you need to spend more time on the initial setting up where these cannot go wrong with partitioning and indexing and it needs to be perfect.

Go for SQL and compare it with pricing and stability with other Microsoft products.

Definitely yes, with Oracle only if the needed situations cannot be met, mostly it covers better.

Best practices are the always a better choice for implementing the solution, hire a good expert and consult a better person with huge experience in architecting database systems for decades.

SQL Server Migration Assistant for Access (AccessToSQL).

We migrated loads of access database into large scale SQL server.

Access validation rules and expressions need improvement while converting into SQL Server.

I've been using it for 10 years, and was using previously older versions and now I'm on the latest one.

We just needed to upgrade Windows.

It was average.

It was average.

I previously used Oracle 11G, I switched because of less hardware resources were needed to run heavy software.

It's straightforward to do providing you've read the manual.

We did it in-house.

It's beneficial in terms of what the business gains from it.

It's average to purchase.

We also looked at Oracle 11G.

First look into scalability issues before adopting the right product.

The most valuable feature is easy installation. It was very easy to install.

The interface is very user-friendly.

I would like to see more integration with other products and it needs to be more secure.

I have been using SQL Server for two months and I believe that we are using the latest version.

It's a stable solution. It's very stable.

It is a scalable solution.

My installation requires SQL Servers, so I have to continue using them.

I have not contacted technical support.

Previously, we did not use another product.

The initial setup was straightforward. The installation was easy.

It took two hours to deploy.

I completed the implementation myself.

I would recommend this solution to others who are interested in using it.

I would rate SQL Server an eight out of ten.

Our server projects are mostly related to SQL Server, and we're using it. All our healthcare projects are using the SQL Server, and we're able to load millions of data without any issues.

It's more user-friendly than most databases. If we don't have to use the command mode, it's very easy.

The performance could be better. When we pump in millions of records, we start struggling, and that's why we want improvement in those areas.

I have been using SQL Server for more than ten years.

In the past, it wasn't stable compared to other products like Oracle Db2, but it has improved, and now it's stable. 

The installation is easy, and performance-wise it's okay now.

SQL Server installation is easy, and we did it by ourselves.

I would recommend this product to new users.

On a scale from one to ten, I would give Microsoft SQL Server an eight.

We primarily use the solution as a database for business operations.

I personally work with Microsoft products and therefore I like the continuity it provides. I like sticking with the brand.

The solution is very stable.

The product has very good online documentation that can be used for troubleshooting.

The solution can scale as necessary.

We've found the setup to be quick and relatively easy.

The licensing costs are very high.

I would like the scaling process to be more transparent and obvious.

There's a lot of documentation on the web, and it is quite extensive, and yet it isn't very well organized which makes it hard to find items often.

I've been using the solution for a very long time. It's been around ten years or more. I'd say it's been at least a decade at this point.

The stability of the solution is quite good. We don't have issues with it. It doesn't crash or freeze. We don't experience bugs or glitches. It's reliable.

While I personally haven't gone beyond 50 or so users, it's my understanding that as long as you pay for the licensing, you can grow as much as you need to. There would be costs involved, however, the solution can scale if a company needs it to. 

I'd love to have Microsoft explain to me the scaling process so that I could better understand it. Right now, I'm in the dark.

In terms of technical support, I can say that sometimes I need them. However, it's very difficult to contact Microsoft support for anything. 

In general, they have none. I wouldn't know how to reach them directly for help if I needed it.

Right now they have good support for their Azure product, in the cloud. However, this is not the case for on-premise products. That means, as an on-premise user, I have a problem. That said, since their product is well-known, there's a lot of documents on the web. If I try to search online I will typically find the answers I need. 

The initial setup is not complex. It's pretty straightforward. It takes an hour or less to set everything up. Some people may need a few hours, however, for me, less than an hour was enough. That said, the Windows Server would also take an hour or two to set up as well.

The solution certainly comes at a cost, however, for me, it's an acceptable cost. I find it acceptable due to the fact that it would be free if I use MySQL on-premise, however, then it would be hard to hire people to maintain it. It's a give and take. That said, the license cost is very very high. I'm afraid if I use it on a larger scale it will cost a lot.

Currently, we're just Microsoft customers, although we would like to have a partnership with the company in the future.

I haven't done the HA for SQL server yet, therefore, I'm not sure how hard it is and how difficult it would be to implement, or how stable and how scalable it is.

There are two markets really. It's Microsoft and non-Microsoft. If anyone is familiar with Microsoft products, then they should go with this, however, they should bear in mind that it comes at a cost. The SQL cost is quite high if a company is using it at a large scale.

That said, if a company is looking at something small scale, there is a free edition. I use the standard edition, and it won't cost too much. 

In any case, for those that aren't tied to Microsoft options, there are a lot of products out there that might be suitable with very little overhead.

In general, I would rate the solution at an eight out of ten.