We compared SQL Azure and Google Cloud SQL based on our user's reviews in several parameters.
User feedback on SQL Azure highlights its fair pricing structure, seamless integration with Microsoft products, and satisfactory customer service. On the other hand, Google Cloud SQL users appreciate its scalability, ease of use, and efficient customer support. Areas for improvement in SQL Azure include enhancing query performance and reducing costs, while Google Cloud SQL users seek better performance optimization and transparent pricing models. Overall, both products offer reliable database management solutions with their unique strengths and weaknesses.
Features: SQL Azure stands out for its seamless integration with other Microsoft products, scalability, and flexibility in deployment options. On the other hand, Google Cloud SQL is praised for its ease of use, high performance, excellent backup and restoration capabilities, and automated maintenance tools.
Pricing and ROI: The setup cost for SQL Azure is deemed reasonable by users, ensuring a smooth and hassle-free experience. On the other hand, Google Cloud SQL's setup cost is well-managed, ensuring a smooth and hassle-free process. There is no mention of specific differences in the setup cost between the two products., In terms of ROI, SQL Azure received positive and satisfactory feedback from users, while Google Cloud SQL users shared their experiences and outcomes.
Room for Improvement: SQL Azure has room for improvement in the areas of query performance, storage capacity, availability, customization options, and cost reduction. Users also want improved security features and integration with other Azure services. Google Cloud SQL users have suggested enhancements in performance optimization, scalability, availability, monitoring, and management tools. They also recommended more transparent pricing models and improved documentation and support resources.
Deployment and customer support: Based on user feedback, the duration required for deployment, setup, and implementation for SQL Azure is inconsistent. Some users report separate timeframes for deployment and setup, while others view them as the same period. On the other hand, Google Cloud SQL users have varying experiences, with some separating deployment and setup durations, and others considering them as one., SQL Azure has been praised for its highly satisfactory customer service, with users commending the responsiveness, efficiency, and knowledge of the support team. Google Cloud SQL also receives positive feedback for its prompt assistance and efficient issue resolution, with users appreciating the friendly nature of the customer service representatives.
The summary above is based on 45 interviews we conducted recently with SQL Azure and Google Cloud SQL users. To access the review's full transcripts, download our report.
"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."
"The most valuable features are that it's easy to use, simple, and user-friendly."
"The implementation part of the product was easy."
"It is not the cool features that I find valuable, it is the stability of Google Cloud Platform."
"The setup was straightforward. Just a couple of clicks, and we were done."
"The initial setup is straightforward."
"It supports different databases, like Postgres and MySQL."
"It's SQL. SQL is so easy if you know something about databases. It's easy to learn."
"One of the most valuable aspects is its seamless integration with Azure Data Factory."
"The stability is good and the performance is fantastic. Even when we try to do an inquiry into issues we can do it easily."
"We have come from hosting on-premise for customers, or they've done it themselves with SQL. We've now taken a cloud offering for the equivalent services of standard database management and the inbuilt backup and restore offerings. The scalability is probably the biggest feature that we are benefiting from by being in the cloud."
"We primarily and generally use it only for DB purposes. When it comes to the Azure part, we can easily provision, scale up, and scale down the generator machine. This kind of flexibility is the USP of SQL Azure. Its interface and ease of use are also valuable. It is very easy to use and integrate with multiple databases. If I need to pull in or import some data from my on-premises database, the ease with which you can connect and pull the data, not only from SQL Server but also from other flavors of MySQL or even Oracle, is very good."
"It is good for scalability and high availability. It is also secure because of Microsoft's cloud investment. It is easy to use because it is on the cloud. Creation or making it available through web services is super easy. Azure SQL can be quickly published as web services for APIs to connect with other applications. Because it is in Microsoft Cloud, you can easily integrate with Microsoft stack."
"Its easy usage is the most valuable."
"The dashboard is valuable."
"Customers can benefit from a lot of cost savings if they go for Azure."
"For data analysis, the AI area of the product has certain shortcomings where improvements are required."
"The purging of the data could be better."
"The monitoring part could be better."
"I am yet to explore a lot of features that are present in this solution. However, it would be good if more documentation is available for this solution. This would help us in preparing for the certification exam and understand it better. Currently, we don't have much documentation. We do the labs for 20 or 25 minutes, but we can't capture and download anything."
"In the case of Google, they need to work on a more easy interface for users."
"The only thing that could be better is the pricing."
"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."
"I would like to see better integration with all the different tools on the platform."
"It can have more dashboards for monitoring, which would naturally help a lot. Other than that, everything is okay."
"I think that the cost management in SQL is not clear because we may use some tax to identify products, but in some cases identifying the transactions in SQL is not easy for some financial cost centers."
"I haven't explored SQL Azure's features much, but I would like to see some better integration with Python."
"Lacking in technical documentation."
"There are some limitations for cross-database queries and features. The migration of data from older systems should be easier. For deployment, there are too many options, which sometimes makes it difficult to figure out the best option. There is not enough information to help you to find the best option for deployment. There should be more documentation about this."
"I feel that the price is high and it could be reduced."
"The pricing plans when using multiple Microsoft solutions are complex and have room for improvement."
"The problem is the automated configuration."
Google Cloud SQL is ranked 4th in Database as a Service with 16 reviews while SQL Azure is ranked 2nd in Database as a Service with 90 reviews. Google Cloud SQL is rated 8.4, while SQL Azure is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Google Cloud SQL writes "An easy-to-use solution with good features and functionality ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SQL Azure writes "The SQL connector effectively syncs data to databases". Google Cloud SQL is most compared with Amazon RDS, MongoDB Atlas, Oracle Database as a Service, Google Cloud Spanner and Oracle Exadata Cloud at Customer, whereas SQL Azure is most compared with Amazon RDS, MongoDB Atlas, Oracle Database as a Service, IBM Db2 on Cloud and Google Cloud Spanner. See our Google Cloud SQL vs. SQL Azure report.
See our list of best Database as a Service vendors.
We monitor all Database as a Service 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.
