Couchbase Capella vs Microsoft Azure SQL Database comparison

"The initial setup was straightforward."

"The way the nodes are managed is interesting."

"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."

"SQL Azure is reliable and scales well."

"What is really helpful about the Azure SQL is that when we have a problem with our sound queries, we can trade information about what indexes we should create on tables. It's really helpful for me and also for developers."

"We're a Microsoft customer, so it fits in with everything else we work with."

"What I like the most is the processes and the easiness of deployments."

"Great auto-scaling and security features."

"The on-premise SQL Server licenses can be used since it is on Azure, so it's a significant savings for the customers."

"The initial setup was straightforward. We did not migrate from an existing system but implemented it from scratch and did not require Microsoft support. We were building Power Platform apps using SharePoint databases and Excel. And after that, we realized that we had to integrate it with SQL. It wasn't too hard, and our partners have people with experience."

"The product could be improved by including a log section for tracking activities, enhancing database integration, and providing more transparency regarding pricing and monitoring activities."

"Rebalancing could be improved."

"I would like to see more compatibility with SSMS and more backward compatibility with regular on-prem SQL."

"Improvement could be made in the performance tools, offering a better overview of core issues like process activity and latency, as we currently rely on third-party tools and SQL jobs for monitoring and alerts."

"Adding users to Azure SQL could be easier. You need to script it out, but it would be nice if it had a UI where you can click and add them. It's not a major thing because we script things all the time, but it would be a minor thing that helps us."

"A potential area for improvement could be integrating with third-party clouds. Adding a feature to bring Azure SQL in Azure with SQL on-premises would be helpful."

"One area for improvement is setting up logs, especially for servers like VM SQL. It was also tricky to connect services on VNets to on-premise."

"They could improve Azure SQL by adding some of the features available on-prem, such as cross-database queries and the ability to run particular jobs. We need to migrate those to something else, like a function or logic app."

"The solution’s visibility could be improved."

"The user interface (UI) could be more flexible."

"If we use a smaller or free-sized Microsoft Azure SQL Database, it is extremely cost-effective and much cheaper than on-premise enterprise licenses, which are expensive."

"When you go with SQL Azure Database, you can create a small database, which is around $4 to $5 per month for development purposes."

"SQL Azure is an expensive solution."

"I have an annual spend number, and it is in the hundred thousand dollar range. There are no additional costs to the standard licensing fees. Even though you have to look at the cost numbers of what you're going to be charged on a monthly basis, what you have to also remember is that your application may need a lot of rewriting and things like that. You get charged not just for the monthly costs but also for the transactions that occur. If your access to the data layer is not so efficient, your costs will go up because you're pulling far more data than you potentially need. These are hidden costs that nobody ever considers. If your application is not written very efficiently, you may actually increase your costs over on-prem versus cloud."

"The cost is around $2,000 per month."

"You can use it for smaller instances and pay less. You can also go for the premium product with all the security, scalability, and business continuity features, but you have to pay a premium amount."

"When looking at the long-term expenses associated with running software on an on-premises server, the costs are almost equivalent but when we include insurance for devices, onsite fees for servers, and other related costs, we may find that this is a cost-effective solution."

"It is quite expensive. I would definitely recommend not using the pay-as-you-go model because this will just mean all your money will go to Microsoft. So, really make sure to control resource usage as much as possible."