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."CockroachDB is highly reliable."
"The availability and the easy to use feature is the most valuable. The documentation is also good."
"The best feature of CockroachDB is the ability to keep the nodes in different locations."
"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."
"The product has valuable security features."
"The initial setup and deployment are simple."
"The tool's most valuable feature is node syncing, which takes only 0.54 milliseconds."
"The most valuable features of the solution are its resiliency features and the geo-partitioning capabilities."
"Easy to implement and user-friendly relational database management system. This product is stable and scalable."
"The most valuable features of SQL Server are the speed, great support, and it is from a known vendor."
"It is the latest technology and pretty powerful in terms of the high availability of the virtual server."
"The scalability is very good."
"The installation is pretty straightforward."
"If you need to, you can scale the solution very easily."
"SQL Server stands out due to its robust parallel processing capabilities."
"The initial setup is easy, flawless."
"We are looking for more features to support distributed high availability and geo-partitioning."
"I find the serverless offer a bit confusing."
"The platform could be more extensible."
"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."
"CockroachDB needs to improve store processes."
"Cockroach does not support all types of protocols. I need to improve it myself to support a CouchDB on my network."
"The product must improve its disaster recovery features."
"The initial setup and pricing could be improved."
"The tool is expensive."
"The remote access aspect needs to be improved in terms of security."
"The tool needs to improve its pricing and technical support."
"For a big amount of data, when we are speaking about IoT Segments, and Big Data projects, there are performance issues."
"SQL Server needs to improve in performance and monitoring because there are no specific monitoring solutions to detect and analyze events for issues in the database. You have to use another monitoring solution. If Microsoft could provide an update to this solution or provide a monitoring solution specifically for SQL Server, it would be very valuable."
"SQL is a highly unstable server - there are patch updates on the Windows server every week, which is why we only use it for non-critical systems."
"Indexing, as well as integration, are areas of this product that need improvement."
"Technical support could be better."
CockroachDB is ranked 9th in Relational Databases Tools with 10 reviews while SQL Server is ranked 1st in Relational Databases Tools with 259 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 IBM Db2 Database. 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.