No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Google Cloud SQL vs SAP Adaptive Server Enterprise comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

Google Cloud SQL
Ranking in Relational Databases Tools
18th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.2
Number of Reviews
24
Ranking in other categories
Database as a Service (DBaaS) (6th), Database Management Systems (DBMS) (9th)
SAP Adaptive Server Enterprise
Ranking in Relational Databases Tools
20th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
5.9
Number of Reviews
14
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2026, in the Relational Databases Tools category, the mindshare of Google Cloud SQL is 1.1%, down from 1.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of SAP Adaptive Server Enterprise is 1.4%, up from 0.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Relational Databases Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Google Cloud SQL1.1%
SAP Adaptive Server Enterprise1.4%
Other97.5%
Relational Databases Tools
 

Featured Reviews

Rituraj NSIT - PeerSpot reviewer
SDE 2 at Virtusa
Drag and drop workflows have simplified data mapping and currently improve my cloud database work
The IPaaS Connector, which I have found most valuable, is part of Google Cloud SQL. Google Cloud's user interface is really good, which improves efficiency in my database operations. The UI is excellent, making it easier to understand what we are doing. Currently, I am working on IPaaS Connector, so it is really just a clickable interface without writing any code. I simply use drag and drop and connecting lines, and it is working. Google Cloud SQL's global infrastructure improves our database's latency metrics because we are using Gemini in our project. Since both are products of Google, it makes our product faster.
reviewer2784705 - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Advisor at a government with 10,001+ employees
Long term database experience has supported OLTP workloads and delivers reliable cross platform migrations
SAP is not putting money into modernizing SAP Adaptive Server Enterprise. One of the things I discovered on the last project I was on was that they did not incorporate the Intel new instruction set in SAP Adaptive Server Enterprise. Intel has augmented its instruction set referred to as new instructions. They did that to make conversion easier. When you migrate SAP Adaptive Server Enterprise cross-platform, you go through a process where it converts the character set. If you are going from AIX to Linux or from Solaris to Linux, Linux is referred to as Little Endian, while AIX or Solaris are considered Big Endian. This is determined by how the product stores data. The word size of these processors is 32 bits long. If you start numbering from the little end, it is referred to as Little Endian. If you start numbering from the big end, it is called Big Endian. To migrate a SAP Adaptive Server Enterprise database from a Big Endian setup like AIX or Solaris to migrate to a Big Endian setup on an Intel, the operating system determines whether it is Little Endian or Big Endian. When you migrate from Big Endian to Little Endian, the database has to go through a character set conversion, and some of these databases are quite large with gigabytes and gigabytes of data. They have to do a character set conversion to the existing database before they do anything else. The worst part is that you have to rebuild all the indexes when you do that. When you switch endianness of the database, you have to rebuild all the indexes. It will automatically do that for system tables, but for actual user databases, you have to rebuild all your indexes, and it takes a long time. SAP Adaptive Server Enterprise is a relational database and is the predecessor of Microsoft SQL Server. All that functionality that Microsoft SQL Server had came from essentially SAP Adaptive Server Enterprise. The problem with SAP Adaptive Server Enterprise these days is it is not expanding its place in the marketplace or expanding its position in the marketplace. A lot of companies have migrated away from SAP Adaptive Server Enterprise. It works fairly well, but the problem is SAP Adaptive Server Enterprise was architected to be an OLTP engine and is now doing things for larger databases that were not in its original intended purpose. The endianness of the RDBMS is a major impediment to continuing to use SAP Adaptive Server Enterprise. You have a multi-gigabyte database, and it will go through a conversion process in a single-threaded fashion, and then you have to rebuild the indexes. Rebuilding the indexes is lengthy and time-consuming. The part of the conversion process that is concerned with conversion of the character set is single-threaded. You may have eight cores on your machine or virtual machine and only one can be used in the conversion process. There is another problem with the whole thing in that it will sometimes not operate properly. Under certain workloads, SAP Adaptive Server Enterprise will become overwhelmed. When you convert it, it does not operate properly in all circumstances. The root cause of that is that SAP in its desire to save money and desire to orphan the product has not recompiled or redeveloped the product to take advantage of the Intel new instruction set. Other relational databases such as Oracle and Microsoft SQL Server have the same issue to deal with, but with those platforms, they are taking advantage of the new instruction set. There are some additional Intel instruction sets or instructions in their Intel instruction set. With SAP Adaptive Server Enterprise, they did not bother to incorporate support for the new instruction set instructions. In certain circumstances, the database does not operate properly. It is unable to do what it needs to do. If you do your research and go on the internet and see what happens with Oracle or Microsoft SQL Server, what comes back is that it takes 4% longer to perform a lot of the instructions. When you are using the new instruction set, it adds 4% to the runtime of the database.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"Google Cloud SQL enhances our AI-driven projects by providing features like query optimization and scalability for efficiently processing large datasets."
"I found its storage and security to be the most valuable. It was a good experience. It is also very stable and scalable, and its support is perfect."
"Google Cloud SQL is highly scalable."
"I found its storage and security to be the most valuable, it was a good experience, it is also very stable and scalable, and its support is perfect."
"This is a stable solution and offers good performance."
"Its most valuable feature is that it's scalable. I can start off with a base of a lot of data and move as much as I want and it's the same as if asked to do a lot of infrastructure changes."
"Google Cloud SQL is very easy to use and easy to set up; it brings the benefits of being simple to perform queries, store data that I needed to store, and extract data when I needed to extract it quite quickly, without having to set up a full database and queries around it."
"The main benefit to our organization is the fact that we no longer need DB admins that take care of the physical servers, backups etc... All this is managed by GCP."
"Provides very good integration."
"SAP Adaptive Server Enterprise was basically as good as its rivals in my experience."
"In SAP Adaptive Server Enterprise, there are some built-in stored procedures that you can use to fire those commands and get the data in a very systematic manner where you can see the results."
"I like that SAP ASE can match code and the database index to index data in the programming language. There are many other valuable features, such as the table buffer, tuning, and various control agents like dispatcher. SAP ASE can handle many different data types, including views, domains, data elements, structures, objects, and various table types that are most useful in the application. Its modularization technique is also handy."
"The most valuable part of the tool stems from the fact that it is a very cost-efficient product compared to the newer technologies because it needs a very small amount of RAM."
"The financials is the most valuable feature for us in operational terms because we deal with a lot of services and SAP has integrated everything for us, both financial reporting and operations."
"It's user-friendly, especially in the logistics field."
"SAP Adaptive Server Enterprise is a good transactional database."
 

Cons

"Google's technical support is good, but they tend to never reopen a case and to send us snippets from the publicly available documentation. It's not as helpful as you would expect, not just for Google Cloud SQL but for all of Google Cloud products."
"They could improve documentation and dashboard stability for efficient user experience and database management."
"The monitoring part could be better."
"There are a few UI glitches that I have noticed recently, specifically something called data mapping in IPaaS Connector. When I click a button such as open configuration on data map configuration, the UI becomes totally white, no text is visible clearly, and it is very frustrating."
"We see latency issues, so we were forced to introduce an in-memory store."
"The purging of the data could be better."
"For write operations – yes, as there is no MySQL clustering mode."
"The overall documentation and the connectors need improvement."
"User interface could be more user friendly."
"When we acquire a new project that is sometimes related to data migrations, after getting those data, there are lots of deadlocks happening."
"Cost-wise, SAP is still expensive compared to other available products."
"There is lack of good support in Mexico - I would prefer Oracle or IBM over SAP in terms of support."
"The solution is kind-of expensive."
"The overall performance of the product is an area where the tool has certain shortcomings and needs to improve."
"They turned a functional product into something where you have to go through a difficult process to do the conversion."
"Better promotion. Sybase seems little known."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"From a financial perspective, Google Cloud SQL is on the cheaper side."
"The solution is affordable."
"You need to pay extra costs for backup and replication."
"While the platform’s pricing may be higher, it aligns with industry standards, considering the quality of service and features provided."
"It's really cheap. It wouldn't be more than, I believe it's around 50 euro per month for running a cloud SQL."
"It is not expensive, especially considering the significant reduction in database management time."
"The pricing is very much an important factor as to why we use this solution."
"I rate SAP Adaptive Server Enterprise's pricing a six out of ten."
"The licensing cost for ASE is pretty low."
"Price-wise, the product is worth it since one needs very less infrastructure to use it."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Relational Databases Tools solutions are best for your needs.
894,738 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
15%
Educational Organization
14%
Computer Software Company
9%
Comms Service Provider
7%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Construction Company
9%
Healthcare Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business9
Midsize Enterprise5
Large Enterprise10
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business3
Large Enterprise11
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Google Cloud SQL?
We have set up automated patch management for Google Cloud SQL, and it does on a daily basis what needs to be done, so it is pretty good overall for maintaining our database security.
What needs improvement with Google Cloud SQL?
I would to improve a few glitches in Google Cloud SQL that I have recently noticed. There are a few UI glitches that I have noticed recently, specifically something called data mapping in IPaaS Con...
What is your primary use case for Google Cloud SQL?
I am not working with Oracle; everything I am working on is on Google. I would like to improve a few glitches in Google Cloud SQL that I have recently noticed. There are a few UI glitches that I ha...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for SAP Adaptive Server Enterprise?
From a pricing perspective, I would say the solution is fairly priced. In Oracle, you have two or three databases at most on one machine. In SAP Adaptive Server Enterprise, one machine can have mul...
What needs improvement with SAP Adaptive Server Enterprise?
SAP is not putting money into modernizing SAP Adaptive Server Enterprise. One of the things I discovered on the last project I was on was that they did not incorporate the Intel new instruction set...
What is your primary use case for SAP Adaptive Server Enterprise?
I have worked with SAP Adaptive Server Enterprise, SAP Adaptive Server Enterprise IQ, and Replication Server. I also worked with SQL Anywhere at one point. SAP acquired Sybase at one point, and the...
 

Also Known As

No data available
SAP ASE
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

BeDataDriven, CodeFutures, Daffodil, GenieConnect, KiSSFLOW, LiveHive, SulAm_rica, Zync
City of Buenos Aires, ASR Group, Citrix, EarlySense, Usha International Limited, Automotive Resources International (ARI), Takisada-Osaka Co. Ltd., Coelba (Grupo Neoenergia), RZD Russian Railways, National Basketball Association - NBA, TALLY
Find out what your peers are saying about Google Cloud SQL vs. SAP Adaptive Server Enterprise and other solutions. Updated: April 2026.
894,738 professionals have used our research since 2012.