SQL Server Previous Solutions

HS
Works at a manufacturing company with 10,001+ employees

We also have Oracle, Db2, and MongoDB databases here. We also have some NoSQL apps, but comparatively, SQL Server has a bigger footprint, and it is better than the others. 

Other systems are more complex to configure. When you configure a cluster on the SQL itself, it is easy to configure because you've got more resources, whereas, when you have to configure Oracle or Db2, you have to have a SPEC process because they have to configure that on Red Hat Linux or Unix side. A few companies don't have special admins for Linux because the footprint is not that big. You might have two or three applications running on that system. When you run into a problem, you need to hire someone who can implement it for you, whereas most of the companies, almost 80%, are Microsoft shops. They already have the talent and resources available. You also have offline help and support. You have a lot of blogs or online help available when it comes to Microsoft, but when you go to other solutions like Oracle, sometimes it is a challenge. You really need the right person there, and not everyone will be able to do it. 

The capability of a solution also depends on your needs and configuration. If you configure things wrong, any system will fail. When I'm testing something, I always believe in the functionality because Microsoft and Oracle test their products thoroughly. I never question their functionality, but we also check it according to our plan. You have to customize things based on your needs. If you're not getting the results, you have to consult the tech support and bring them in to configure it. These are the things that you run into when you are in your own data center. If you are not getting the throughput from the storage itself, you need to get the storage admin or storage vendor in there. When you move to the cloud, everything is taken care of.

View full review »
PJ
Professional Services Manager at Business Intelligence DA

I have been working in IT for 40 years and I've worked with all of the major databases for BI. These include Oracle, IBM Db2, Netezza, Sybase IQPostgreSQL, and MySQL.

PostgreSQL and MySQL are available to use free of charge. However, there is more to do in order to get things to work on those databases. This extra work costs money. Over a five-year period, SQL Server SE is cheaper.

I used to sell a lot of Sybase IQ to telecoms. The only choices were Oracle, Teradata and Sybase IQ at the high end. Oracle and Teradata were very  expensive. Sybase IQ would run on a bunch of different platforms and we were charging $50,000 USD per core. We sold a lot of IQ.

Nowadays, we can do a lot of what we used to do on Sybase IQ on SQL Server SE for $3,700 per core. It's a big difference.

When you're living in Eastern Europe you can see that other databases have some better features, but you've still got to talk to the chief financial officer and ask for the money.

Today, we're working mostly with SQL Server SE because, in Romania, SQL Server is very popular because it is cheaper than the other solutions.

View full review »
MJ
Senior Database Administrator at a comms service provider with 10,001+ employees

I've also used Oracle and MySQL in the past. This company hasn't switched. I've just used other solutions in various roles over the years. We have Oracle in place for our financials still. There's no need for my SQL and Postgres. They're open-source tools.

View full review »
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.
Azizul Haque - PeerSpot reviewer
AVP, IT Division at NCC BANK LIMITED

We used a flat-file database earlier, and since 2008, we have been using SQL Server. We started with SQL Server 2008 edition, and later on moved to 2012, 2014, and 2019.

We switched because there were many problems in the flat-file database. There was so much inconsistency. Some files were updated, and some files were not. There were big network issues. SQL Server has eliminated such issues, so either all transactions happen or nothing happens. This is a Relational Database Management System, and this is at another level compared to the flat-file database.

View full review »
HB
Domain architect at a financial services firm with 10,001+ employees

We used Oracle and DB2 in the past.

View full review »
MB
Sr. Training Manager with 201-500 employees

They're now using a different database for contracting called Road Runner. I don't know what that is, and how it stores data. I don't know anything about it. 

There is also Postgres. I like SQL Server more than Postgres. That's only because I know SQL Server. I don't know Postgres as well. So, I can't say which one is better because I don't have the same amount of experience in both.

View full review »
AM
Database Architect at Huron Consulting

Our company has probably been using this solution since it was released.

View full review »
SE
IT Analysis at Kirkby (Tyres) Ltd

We switched to SQL for the reliability and scalability.

View full review »
MM
Group CEO at Mmusi Group

I've used different solutions. There are times when I use Db2, and there are times when I use Oracle Database. Oracle beats SQL Server when it comes to procedures and process optimization.

View full review »
RN
President at a consultancy with 1-10 employees

This client, the big client I've been talking about, had some ancient DOS system from the 70s when I got there in 2012. They had no data dictionary note. I think it was running on an early version of Unix on a Compaq machine. When I got there, it was 15 years old. The thing was still running until six months ago. You can't believe it. This thing wouldn't die. I tried to make it die multiple times, but we converted from that system onto Dynamics NAV.

It's a two year undertaking. The SQL was stable all the time, never had a problem with it.

View full review »
BL
Certified Adjunct Faculty, School of Engineering and Computing at a university with 1,001-5,000 employees

Previous to my position at the university, I worked both as an employee and a consultant and was very much involved with Oracle as a database for years, going back to 1997 and until about 2010.

View full review »
FR
CEO Owner at ALESON ITC

I previously used Informix DB because Linux was not the best tool for enterprise when I began working in the industry. Microsoft was working on new technologies and when they came out with SQL I switched to it. I've had the certification on SQL for several years already. 

View full review »
Prashant Baste - PeerSpot reviewer
Sr. Solution Architect at Team Computers

I interact with multiple data sources, multiple customers and their ERPs. It can be Oracle, SAP or MongoDB among other solutions. MongoDB, for example, is a little more complex than the SQL Server and we often have more of a challenge establishing a connection with MongoDB.

View full review »
Ahmed-Ramy - PeerSpot reviewer
CEO at TMentors

I've also used SQL Azure.

The recommendation is based on the use case. It depends on what use case the customer will need. If they don't have the capacity to manage their own Server, I would recommend Azure, as it's managed. Therefore, you don't have to worry about the management and administration.

The main difference between the two is, in some data types it is not available on SQL Azure while it's available on SQL Server or vice versa. There's a version of SQL Server with a little bit of limited functionality. That said, the difference is not huge. You can go back and forth between them if you want.

View full review »
MA
Senior DBA & IT Consultant at MA Consulting

We did not use a solution prior to SQL Server, with the exception of, maybe, Access. 

View full review »
RN
Manager at a pharma/biotech company with 10,001+ employees

Areas in our organization use AWS Lambda.

We use other relational databases. The most important product besides SQL Server is Oracle. We use SQL Server and Oracle equally.

View full review »
EverVidal - PeerSpot reviewer
Architect of Solutions at Interbank

I worked on Oracle Database for four years. In the last year, I have been working with various cloud databases, including Cosmos DB and DynamoDB in AWS and Azure.

View full review »
AR
Works at a financial services firm with 51-200 employees

Approximately 10 years ago, I used Oracle Database.

View full review »
AM
VP Global Information Technology at a insurance company with 10,001+ employees

We did not use other solutions prior to SQL Server. 

View full review »
TL
SQL Database Administrator at Aurora Mental Health Center

SQL's been the main solution for this company. I have, however, used Oracle in the past with other companies.

View full review »
TN
System engineer at a financial services firm with 51-200 employees

I use MySQL and when comparing the solutions I have found the SQL Server is much more professional, and it's quite big and robust. MySQL is a community of people who are contributing to a project and you have to hack them in order for it to work. But it is quite good as well.

View full review »
Vishal Khare - PeerSpot reviewer
IT manager at Electrolux Home Products

We use SAP HANA as a database solution for certain use cases.

View full review »
BC
Senior Developer at a government with 51-200 employees

Here at the company, they used Postgres, and what I didn't care about it was that it was okay, but it didn't integrate with a lot of the other applications. I felt Microsoft did a better job of that.

View full review »
RU
Senior Solutions Architect at a manufacturing company with 51-200 employees

I have previously used other RDBMS solutions, such as Oracle MySQL, Maria DB, PostgreSQL, and IBM DB2.

When comparing PostgreSQL, Oracle MySQL, and Microsoft SQL, Microsoft SQL has an advantage over the other two server databases because it provides a graphical user interface by default.

View full review »
Prashant Baste - PeerSpot reviewer
Sr. Solution Architect at Team Computers

We also currently use Oracle. 

View full review »
Kevin Honde - PeerSpot reviewer
Data Solution Architect at Econet Wireless Zimbabwe

We were using different products. 

View full review »
Reza Sadeghi - PeerSpot reviewer
Software Development Team Lead at asa com

I used Oracle in the past, approximately four years ago. That was stable, but the performance in SQL is very much better nowadays.

View full review »
Rafael Keller - PeerSpot reviewer
IT Manager at Pluris Midia

We used the Oracle Database prior to SQL Server.

View full review »
SA
Applications Business Intelligence Analyst at a aerospace/defense firm with 10,001+ employees

My team and I have tried many different technologies including MySQL (cheap but effective), Oracle (expensive and effective), PostgreSQL, and DB2. I never jumped on the PostgreSQL or DB2 train, but could not give you a specific reason why due to my limited knowledge of the products. It usually came down to lack of knowledge for available programmers in our area, meaning we would have to train new hires and take a lot of time getting them familiar with a new database structure. That defaulted us to either Oracle or SQL Server since MySQL was not used in production at the time due to limitations surrounding support.

Oracle owns MySQL these days and they, of course, would prefer you run full fledged Oracle database for support needs. Oracle’s supremely expensive licensing has normally pushed me and coworkers to Microsoft SQL Server although every organization I have worked with pays for some form of Oracle even though SQL Server is primarily touching end users.

I personally feel Oracle is a great database but also think Microsoft SQL Server can be configured to run just as well as Oracle in most cases. The problem I normally find is that many bloated applications run SQL Server where more streamlined (and many times less functional) applications run Oracle. For that reason primarily, Oracle has had a better reputation in the pre-Amazon world.

This could all change in the years to come as Microsoft starts to fight Amazon and Google in cloud processing.

View full review »
BL
Owner at 2 Bit

I'm not only working with SQL Server. When I need the database, I will always do it in SQL Server or Maria Database or something like that.

View full review »
FZ
Principal Database And Cloud Architect at a financial services firm with 10,001+ employees

I'm more into open source solutions, and I love Postgres. I've worked as a database administrator as well. But I really hate all the tools used to manage performance or backup or just any of those disaster, recovery, and availability solutions. I hate them. They really impose a lot of overhead in a demonstration and aren't really flexible. When you're in the cloud, you don't have to worry about most of those things. 

Some of them still exist, but the cloud providers do provide them and you stick to that. You enhance them or add some more features, but really the most hated feature is, making sure that your database really can recover from many kinds of disasters. Resiliency, the most important part and when that is really managed by the cloud online, the overhead costs  are removed. The rest is really easy. Performance is okay, and there are indicated spots for data because I work with financial data and a lot of it is our important critical data. So, the cloud is really the best thing that happened to us.

View full review »
DG
Information Systems Manager at a aerospace/defense firm with 51-200 employees

We haven't used any other solution prior to SQL Server. It was just a flat-file.

View full review »
Mohamed Abozied - PeerSpot reviewer
Network Administrator at Alsafy

I did not use a different solution before using SQL. 

View full review »
Ariful Ambia - PeerSpot reviewer
Executive Director at a manufacturing company with 5,001-10,000 employees

For databases, we have used a lot of data tests with other solutions, such as Oracle. We have used all Oracle data, Postgres, and a few others.

View full review »
US
Team Lead, Process Improvement at Fidelity Bank Plc

We've always used SQL. I also use SQLite.

View full review »
SL
Enterprise Architect at a educational organization with 10,001+ employees

I also have experience with Oracle and I find that SQL Server is easier to work with, but it is not as powerful.

View full review »
Karoly Krokovay - PeerSpot reviewer
CEO at Informula Ltd

I have previously used Oracle.

View full review »
AS
Business Intelligence Manager at a consumer goods company with 10,001+ employees

Previously, I was using SAP, which is good. The technology is great. It has many more features than Microsoft SQL, like the data architect and performance.

My plan was to use SAP HANA, but we had an acquisition in our company, so we got a new team and new managers. The head of BI decided to go with Microsoft, however, my POC was already accepted with SAP HANA and AWS cloud hosting. We went in the other direction and started using SQL because the people who were hired were more familiar with the Microsoft technology rather than SAP. 

View full review »
OK
Solution Architect at KIAN company

I have used MySQL.

View full review »
GS
Managing Partner at Bizz Advisers SRL

I also use MySQL — the open-source version. I started using SQL Server because we required some special functionality for a specific project. 

View full review »
Girish Vijay - PeerSpot reviewer
Deputy Manager IT at Carl Bechem Lubricants India Pvt. Ltd.

SQL standard 2008.

View full review »
Ashif  Shaikh - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Database Administrator at a tech services company with 501-1,000 employees

I also have experience with Postgres. The main difference between SQL Server and Postgres is that Postgres is open source. The Community version of Postgre is basically free. Postgres is very easy to set up and very easy to scale. It is quite a good database.

View full review »
RV
2de Solution Engineer - storage & compute at a financial services firm with 10,001+ employees

We also use Oracle. We've used it for over a decade already.

View full review »
MS
Head of Technical Support at a real estate/law firm with 51-200 employees

I have previously used IBM Informix, PostgresSQL, and Oracle Databases.

View full review »
ST
Director at a tech services company with 10,001+ employees

We have used SQL Server from day one, along with OpenSQL. We used them both regularly.

We don't use Oracle often but we do have a few areas where it is used.

View full review »
SB
Cloud Data Architect (Data service Team) at NTT Data India Enterprise Application Services Pri

It's hard to tell the exact reason of switching. As I told earlier, Choosing DB cannot be measured only on the performance of the Database. Multiple points need to be considered.

View full review »
PS
Project Advisor at A private sector Company

We were a Microsoft shop (.NET, Share point etc) primarily, hence using MS SQL Server 2008.

View full review »
HT
System Engineer at CMC CSI saigon

I have some experience with McAfee MVISION Endpoint. We are focused on the MV1 edition. We have to blend into the EDR.

McAfee has three editions, MVISION 1, 2, and 6. We are still working with version 1.

We are also working with Endpoint Plan 1.

We have 15 servers, both Windows OS and Linux OS.

View full review »
JJ
Business Solutions Architect at a real estate/law firm with 501-1,000 employees

We have tried using different technologies, depending on the use case. This is not the best tool for document-oriented or unstructured data.

View full review »
it_user422262 - PeerSpot reviewer
CEO/CTO at a tech services company with 51-200 employees

I typically use whatever database platform my client uses. However, whenever I am provided with the option to choose, I will always go with SQL Server.

View full review »
Serban Stancu - PeerSpot reviewer
Technical Director/ Project Manager / Consultant at SC Iceberg Data Intelligence SR

I use to work with Informatica via the Oracle package and switched to SQL because it is cheaper and a bit better than the others.

View full review »
Muhammad_Irfan - PeerSpot reviewer
Sr. Network Administrator at ACMC

Before implementing SQL Server, we used Oracle. We switched to SQL Server because it had good integration. 

View full review »
AL
Senior Service Architect at a tech services company with 501-1,000 employees

I'm also familiar with other servers such as Oracle. While we must do as the client wants or needs, if I could choose, I would probably utilize databases like Oracle or open-source databases more often. It depends on the cases. That said, quite often I'm in a position where I cannot suggest the technology, so I use what the client requests.

View full review »
MF
Information Technology Manager at OrchidaSoft

We have tried many versions of Oracle, including Oracle 11, Oracle 12, and the latest version, which is easy to maintain and similar to Microsoft.

Some of our clients are also using Express SQL. It is not good, but also not bad. If you have small amounts of data then it will meet the requirements.

View full review »
BM
Senior Manager - RPA & Transition at a financial services firm with 10,001+ employees

We did not use any other databases prior to SQL. We only use SQL.

View full review »
Meindert Van Der Galiën - PeerSpot reviewer
Information Technology Software Developer at a financial services firm with 501-1,000 employees

I have experience with Postgres.

The main functionality that I've encountered within the six months is that Postgres is capable to incorporate itself or integrate itself with any known choosing standard API. With the SQL Server, we've got to use connection strings or connection pooling to do this. The API function is not as robust in SQL Server as it is in Postgres as the Postgres user package is based on APIs. Packages based on other companies or software languages that have the communication protocols are already enabled. With SQL Server, you have to hard code those connection strings or connection poolings for the APIs, which makes it far more difficult to use. However, it is still capable of doing it, it is just a longer approach.

View full review »
MO
Senior Manager at a financial services firm with 201-500 employees

We also use Oracle Servers. 

View full review »
FA
IT Assistant at Hotel 2 Fevrier
HP
Computer engineering student at a educational organization with 501-1,000 employees

I've also worked with PostgreSQL, and MySQL as well as MongoDB. I found that, in comparison, PostgreSQL was not as easy to use.

View full review »
VP
Chief Information Officer at a financial services firm with 501-1,000 employees

We have used SQL Server from the beginning.

View full review »
MM
Director of Data Analytics at a insurance company with 1,001-5,000 employees

Previously, I was working with Oracle Exadata at a different company. It was great, and ran very smoothly.

View full review »
BG
Systems Analyst/DBA at Vecima Networks

I did not use a previous solution. I have heard of other companies using Microsoft Access or Excel for similar problems. However, after hearing the headaches they have, I would not recommend those for large scale projects.

View full review »
SA
IT Director at DAR AL ARKAN

In the earlier versions, we used log shipping to the other servers for the failover and replication requirements. With this version, all the servers are Active/Active and there is no issue related to the availability or failover.

View full review »
EM
Enterprise Solutions Architect at a comms service provider with 501-1,000 employees

We evaluated each product after using it, starting with Informix DB and ending with Oracle.

Oracle, Informix DB, PostgreSQL, and MySQL are among the products we use.

View full review »
VG
Regional Head Customer Experience at a financial services firm with 10,001+ employees

We have been using Hadoop and Spark.

View full review »
AG
Technical Director at Progetti e Soluzioni

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.

View full review »
AM
Sr. DBA/Developer at a financial services firm with 5,001-10,000 employees

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.

View full review »
it_user79482 - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Developer at a tech vendor with 201-500 employees

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.

View full review »
KopanoRamaphoi - PeerSpot reviewer
Consultant at Rpc Data

I also have experience with Oracle Database. When I compared pricing between the two products, I found that Microsoft was more expensive.

View full review »
MM
Head of IT, CTO at a insurance company with 51-200 employees

I am using Avamar and Data Domain. I have been using Data Domain for four or five years. It was used as the data storage for the backup solution in our sister company.

I worked with Oracle in the previous company. Microsoft SQL Server is better.

We have also used Software Center, Active Directory, Microsoft Exchange, and almost everything that is Microsoft-based.

View full review »
FN
Senior Database Administrator at ITGStore

I am  satisfied with SQL Server.

Use of alternative solutions varies with the client involved. Some make use of all that SQL Server has to offer, while others employ everything in Oracle Database. We have managed to resolve any issues they have encountered in the two cases in which they have approached us. 

When examining Oracle or IBM db2, Oracle and SQL Server are generally the prefered products. 

View full review »
MC
Engineer at a manufacturing company with 10,001+ employees

Previously, I used MySQL.

View full review »
MP
CEO at SkyNet

I am also using Sophos.

View full review »
ST
System Engineer at asa

I have also worked with SAP HANA.

View full review »
it_user715902 - PeerSpot reviewer
CEO and Founder at a tech services company

No, I have been using SQL Server for the past 20 years.

View full review »
PN
Data Analyst at a media company with 1,001-5,000 employees

Used MS Access, but data ports became too large for it to support, so we needed a product to take us to the next level as our data ports grew.

View full review »
it_user290769 - PeerSpot reviewer
Enterprise Architect with 51-200 employees

Open Source database and OLAP solution was found to lack stability, and required the installation of many moving parts in order to have a complete stack. These services don't always work together well, and the various online communities would frequently blame the other for issues.

View full review »
OB
Operations Director at ALTERSIS Performance

I've also used Oracle in the past. From my side, Oracle is more technical and is more scalable, and more secure than the SQL server.

View full review »
DB
Sr Tech Business Analyst, Group Data Projects & Ventures at a financial services firm with 10,001+ employees

I typically use SQL wherever I go, however, I don't necessarily use Microsoft all the time. I also occasionally use a solution called Teradata.

View full review »
it_user158343 - PeerSpot reviewer
Software Architect at a tech consulting company with 51-200 employees

I have always used DW tools from Microsoft since SQL Server 2000.

View full review »
it_user290733 - PeerSpot reviewer
IT Consultant & IT Project Manager Assistant with 10,001+ employees

We were using a few other solutions such as MySQL, Oracle and Pervasive PSQL.

View full review »
it_user158343 - PeerSpot reviewer
Software Architect at a tech consulting company with 51-200 employees

I have used data warehouse tools from Microsoft since SQL Server 2000.

View full review »
BG
Technical Systems Support Manager at a hospitality company with 201-500 employees

As with Oracle Database, the solution has a reliable database. I do not see much difference between the two when it comes to usage and the program decision to use one solution over another varies with the appropriateness of a given product, some utilizing Oracle, others Scale.

View full review »
MK
Senior Digital Services Engineer at a pharma/biotech company with 1,001-5,000 employees

I've also worked with Oracle in the past. At this company, since it is an older server, it may have been in service longer. We were using the two databases for two different functions.

View full review »
SW
GF at Innopact GmbH

For a specific task, we are using this solution. However, for some other tasks, we're using MongoDB, MariaDB, Oracle, or something else. It depends on the task and the solution and the requirements.

View full review »
KV
Data Architect at ACPAS Loan Management Software

We did not previously use a different solution. We've only ever really used SQL.

View full review »
KG
Lead Data Architect at a financial services firm with 1,001-5,000 employees

Previously, we had not used any other solutions. We have been a Microsoft shop from the beginning.

View full review »
PS
Programmer Analyst at a tech services company with 10,001+ employees
磊刘
DBA,data architectuire at LG CNS Co.

I have no choice. our customer choose MS SQL 

View full review »
it_user796899 - PeerSpot reviewer
Sr. Database and Application Administrator with 10,001+ employees

We previously used MySQL, because it is a free product. It was just hard to operate, do backups, and make automated. Also, it was not scalable.

View full review »
HG
Technical Content Writer at a computer software company with 51-200 employees

We did not previously use a different solution. We are currently moving towards MongoDB, however.

View full review »
it_user408555 - PeerSpot reviewer
Technical lead/Senior embedded software engineer at a wireless company with 51-200 employees

I have experience with Sybase SQL Anywhere .

I switched mainly because the SQL Server is widely deployed and known, for better XML support, and for better integration with .NET framework and its related technologies.

View full review »
DK
Senior Systems Engineer at a energy/utilities company with 201-500 employees

We didn't use any other solution previously. We have been using it for a long time.

View full review »
RS
Business Analytics Manager at a transportation company with 201-500 employees

I'm a big fan of Oracle, which I have worked with for 18 years. Comparing the two is like comparing the iOS of Apple versus Windows. They're two very different systems and typically you either like one or the other.

View full review »
it_user272976 - PeerSpot reviewer
Managing Director at a tech services company with 11-50 employees

We used PostgreSQL, and we also used some other OLAP servers.

View full review »
it_user718458 - PeerSpot reviewer
Corporate Data and BI Lead - Database Administrator at a logistics company with 10,001+ employees
it_user284160 - PeerSpot reviewer
Freelance at a tech services company with 51-200 employees

This was the solution I've used.

View full review »
it_user103896 - PeerSpot reviewer
Sales Engineer at a tech consulting company with 11-50 employees
We also used Oracle. We supported both with our application. View full review »
DS
Technical Director at a security firm with 51-200 employees

I have used Microsoft Access.

View full review »
YW
Information Security Engineer at a security firm with 11-50 employees

Previously, we did not use another product.

View full review »
RS
Software Developer at OATI

I have been using SQL Server from the start.

View full review »
DM
Chief of Engineering at a comms service provider with 11-50 employees

Postgre has a weird syntax and it is slower than MS SQL. The command line interpeter makes it complex to learn.

View full review »
it_user117381 - PeerSpot reviewer
Lead Software Engineer at a tech services company with 11-50 employees

Yes I did use another solution previously. The switch was mainly for the performance. Secondly, it was for the technology compatibility.

View full review »
JI
System Analyst and Team Lead at a tech services company with 11-50 employees

I have used MySQL.

View full review »
it_user369171 - PeerSpot reviewer
Brazil IT Coordinator at a transportation company with 1,001-5,000 employees

I am still using other commercial solutions, but the price of this database is much less expensive than others. It is about four times less expensive.

View full review »
CM
Systems Engineer at a tech services company with 11-50 employees

We also use IBM DB2. We support it for our customers.

View full review »
IF
CEO at a tech services company with 51-200 employees

I have used previously Oracle MySQL, IBM DB2, and SAP HANA. They are better suited for large-size data management.

View full review »
it_user493200 - PeerSpot reviewer
Pre-Sales/System Architect at a tech services company with 5,001-10,000 employees

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

View full review »
it_user359604 - PeerSpot reviewer
Web Content Editor at a consumer goods company with 501-1,000 employees

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

View full review »
it_user280197 - PeerSpot reviewer
BI Solution Architect at a tech services company with 501-1,000 employees

We used a combination of RDBMS platforms and we still do in addition to this solution.

View full review »
it_user165207 - PeerSpot reviewer
Infrastructure Analyst / Engineer (24x7) at a tech services company with 501-1,000 employees

I previously used MongoDB before the stability of innovative products still remains questionable in both theory and practice. 

View full review »
SP
Chief Information Officer at a tech consulting company with 51-200 employees

I previously used a different solution in the other company I worked for.

View full review »
it_user585195 - PeerSpot reviewer
DBA de Desenvolvimento at a tech services company

I have used Oracle and I also use IBM DB2. All of them have pros and cons.

View full review »
it_user231318 - PeerSpot reviewer
Associate Consultant with 501-1,000 employees

We were using a solution from Informatica for ETL purpose, which was 8.5/10, but now we are doing it through SSIS, because it is easy to use and its cost.

View full review »
it_user135978 - PeerSpot reviewer
Developer at a retailer with 501-1,000 employees
Better user experience, very rich functionality and good reliability. View full review »
CL
Data Analyst at a tech company with 51-200 employees

Previously, I was using MySQL.

View full review »
it_user252576 - PeerSpot reviewer
Business Intelligence and Decision Support Team Leader at a university with 1,001-5,000 employees

No. We’ve been using SQL Server for 17 years.

View full review »
MM
Development Associate & Manager at a educational organization with 501-1,000 employees

I am using Amazon Cognito for the first time in my company.

View full review »
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.