Google Cloud SQL vs Microsoft Azure SQL Database comparison

Google and Microsoft are both solutions in the Database as a Service (DBaaS) category. Google is ranked #6 with an average rating of 7.8, while Microsoft is ranked #1 with an average rating of 8.5. Google holds a 7.8% mindshare in DS, compared to Microsoft’s 10.7% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of Google users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 96% of Microsoft users who would recommend it.

Google Cloud SQL

Read 23 Google Cloud SQL reviews

2,134 Views
2,070 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

Microsoft Azure SQL Database

Read 134 Microsoft Azure SQL Database reviews

4,005 Views
3,925 Comparison Views

96% willing to recommend

Google Cloud SQL

Microsoft Azure SQL Database

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Nov 2, 2025

Microsoft Azure SQL Database and Google Cloud SQL compete in the SQL database solutions category. Microsoft Azure SQL Database holds the upper hand due to its extensive enterprise-focused features and integration capabilities.

Features: Microsoft Azure SQL Database provides high availability, scalability, and a variety of integration options. It is recognized for its robust documentation and security investments. Google Cloud SQL is known for its ease of management, scalability, and seamless integration with GCP services.

Room for Improvement: Microsoft Azure SQL Database could improve automation, security, and bring more features to align with on-premises SQL. Google Cloud SQL users wish for better documentation, easier integrations, and more cost-effective solutions, especially with BigQuery.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Microsoft Azure SQL Database offers flexible deployment options across public, private, and hybrid clouds, with varying support experiences. Google Cloud SQL emphasizes simple public cloud deployment but could enhance proactive customer service.

Pricing and ROI: Microsoft Azure users face complex licensing structures but benefit from a pay-as-you-go model that can reduce total ownership costs. Google Cloud SQL has a simpler pricing model but can become expensive at scale, though efficient management often offsets these costs.

To learn more, read our detailed Google Cloud SQL vs. Microsoft Azure SQL Database Report (Updated: February 2026).

Buyer's Guide

Google Cloud SQL vs. Microsoft Azure SQL Database

February 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 881,455 peers since 2012

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 Database as a Service (DBaaS)

6th

Average Rating

8.2

Reviews Sentiment

6.9

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Relational Databases Tools (19th), Database Management Systems (DBMS) (9th)

Microsoft Azure SQL Database

Ranking in Database as a Service (DBaaS)

1st

Average Rating

8.6

Reviews Sentiment

6.9

Number of Reviews

134

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2026, in the Database as a Service (DBaaS) category, the mindshare of Google Cloud SQL is 7.8%, down from 16.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Microsoft Azure SQL Database is 10.7%, down from 16.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Database as a Service (DBaaS) Market Share Distribution
Product	Market Share (%)
Microsoft Azure SQL Database	10.7%
Google Cloud SQL	7.8%
Other	81.5%

Database as a Service (DBaaS)

Featured Reviews

Victor Danso

Database Engineer at Springer Nature

Migration to cloud eases management but needs better support for high I/O operations

Google Cloud SQL needs to improve its support for high-end I/O operations. On-prem systems with high I/O capabilities perform better, as Google Cloud SQL takes more time to handle the same tasks. There is also difficulty in changing the time zone after the database is set up. Moreover, some features available in MSSQL on-prem are missing on Google Cloud SQL, affecting migration potential.

Read full review

Thomas Sawyer

Executive Director, Platform Architecture at Sumitomo Mitsui Banking Corporation – SMBC Group

Automatic tuning and multi-region availability have reduced manual workloads and improved performance management

The features of Microsoft Azure SQL Database that I like the most are easy scaling and high availability. I appreciate those features because it's easy to make Microsoft Azure SQL Database readily available in a multi-region infrastructure. Using Microsoft Azure SQL Database is very easy; it's much easier than SQL on-premise because I don't have to worry about deploying infrastructure, and I can rapidly deploy via infrastructure as code. I am using the automatic tuning feature in Microsoft Azure SQL Database. We are using the new feature of data encryption in Microsoft Azure SQL Database with customer-managed keys only. The reliability and stability of Microsoft Azure SQL Database platform are rock-solid; it's as good, if not better, than what our on-premise stability has been from an uptime perspective.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The initial setup is straightforward."

"What I like the most about Google Cloud SQL is that it handles the management, which allows us to concentrate on our applications."

"It supports different databases, like Postgres and MySQL."

"The setup was straightforward. Just a couple of clicks, and we were done."

"The deployment model allows for significant control and flexibility."

"It directly provides robust data safety. It also offers various other storage options, such as Google Cloud Storage. These services ensure data security and redundancy. Furthermore, it includes different storage classes, allowing flexible data management tailored to specific needs."

"From a database management perspective, it provides services without the need for me to worry about backups, scaling, or other operational issues."

"Google Cloud SQL is highly scalable."

More Google Cloud SQL pros

"Our migration to Azure for most databases has increased our organization's efficiency and reduced the maintenance required to manage on-premises infrastructure."

"Using Azure Active Directory is a great feature for securing our connectivity for any clients or users connecting to our data."

"I rate Microsoft Azure SQL Database 10 out of 10."

"The features of Microsoft Azure SQL Database that I find most valuable are the ability to scale it up and down dynamically with customer load, which is necessary because during the day or business hours when there's more load, we need to scale it up and scale it back down at night for cost efficiency."

"It is very fast in replicating the data from one database to another. We do some extractions from multiple databases to a target database that we use for visualization. It has a good speed."

"One of the most valuable aspects is its seamless integration with Azure Data Factory."

"The ability to maintain different environments, such as development and production databases, is valuable."

"In terms of stability, because Microsoft is the underlying technology, they are much more stable than say Oracle. Since 2014 they did a great job in offering stability, performance and high visibility on the solution, especially in comparison to the other competitors."

More Microsoft Azure SQL Database pros

Cons

"When discussing media files, such as images and audio files, stored in Google Cloud, concerns about handling large amounts of data arise."

"I would appreciate more flexibility with specific extensions applicable to engines like PostgreSQL. This would enhance the capabilities of Google Cloud SQL."

"The performance compared to AWS is not as fast, and the technical support could be better as they don't have a dedicated team, but mostly AI handles the support now."

"The purging of the data could be better."

"Sometimes the sharing with third parties or configuring that in Google Cloud SQL is not the most intuitive."

"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."

"To create a seamless data integration, the title integration of these databases with the data integration platforms is essential. This is what we would like to have in a future release."

"In the case of Google, they need to work on a more easy interface for users."

More Google Cloud SQL cons

"In terms of support, they don't give much support."

"The solution could improve by supporting more operating systems."

"Microsoft Azure SQL Database could be improved by offering an easier way to view all existing roles in the database without needing complex queries found online."

"The solution can be improved by reducing the constraints available."

"We've had many concurrency issues with it, particularly with applications that do a lot of parallel processing."

"Scalability is an issue because we can't upgrade to new versions due to hardware limitations."

"Some issues with scalability."

"The document storage is primarily relational, which is not ideally suited for SQL. If there were better integration with SharePoint for document handling in SQL, it would greatly benefit the organization. Moreover, the current on-premise limitations prevent direct file pulling, limiting certain capabilities."

More Microsoft Azure SQL Database cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The solution is affordable."

"While the platform’s pricing may be higher, it aligns with industry standards, considering the quality of service and features provided."

"You need to pay extra costs for backup and replication."

"It's really cheap. It wouldn't be more than, I believe it's around 50 euro per month for running a cloud SQL."

"From a financial perspective, Google Cloud SQL is on the cheaper side."

"The pricing is very much an important factor as to why we use this solution."

"It is not expensive, especially considering the significant reduction in database management time."

"I find that they are relatively expensive, especially when compared to AWS, where the prices are notably lower."

"It is beneficial in terms of cost because you are charged per data unit instead of licensing."

"We have the licensing fee, and we are also paying a third party to maintain it with an SLA. There is no infrastructure cost, but its running costs are higher than expected. There is the cost of the Azure cloud, which is pricier than expected, but it is not specific to SQL Azure. It is specific to the cloud. You expect it to be cheaper, but it is more expensive to run it."

"I am not aware of the exact pricing, but our monthly bill for Azure is around 80,000. It is less expensive than using SQL Server. It has the pay-as-you-go model, and the charges are based on the usage."

"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."

"It is expensive for us. We are looking for something less expensive and thinking of migrating the whole system."

"The price could be slightly cheaper."

"I would like it to be cheaper, but comparatively, it is reasonably priced."

More Microsoft Azure SQL Database pricing and cost advice

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Database as a Service (DBaaS) solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

881,455 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

14%

Computer Software Company

11%

Educational Organization

University

Financial Services Firm

12%

Marketing Services Firm

Computer Software Company

Manufacturing Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	9
Midsize Enterprise	4
Large Enterprise	9

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	59
Midsize Enterprise	17
Large Enterprise	61

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Google Cloud SQL?

The implementation part of the product was easy.

See all answers

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.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Google Cloud SQL?

Sometimes the sharing with third parties or configuring that in Google Cloud SQL is not the most intuitive. From a user perspective, if Google Cloud SQL integrated AI directly into the query so tha...

See all answers

What do you like most about SQL Azure?

The automated scalability feature of SQL Azure has proven to be highly beneficial, particularly when deployed in the cloud.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for SQL Azure?

I would say I am at a basic experience level with the pricing, setup costs and licensing because while I am the administrator for the service, I do not provision the services and worry about the co...

See all answers

What needs improvement with SQL Azure?

I have no comments at the moment on how Microsoft Azure SQL Database can be improved. I have no comments on additional features that I would like to see released in the next release. I do not have ...

See all answers

Comparisons

Amazon RDS vs Google Cloud SQL

Compared 27% of the time

MongoDB Atlas vs Google Cloud SQL

Compared 13% of the time

Oracle Database as a Service vs Google Cloud SQL

Compared 5% of the time

Google Cloud Spanner vs Google Cloud SQL

Compared 4% of the time

Oracle Exadata Cloud at Customer vs Google Cloud SQL

Compared 4% of the time

More Google Cloud SQL Competitors

Amazon RDS vs Microsoft Azure SQL Database

Compared 16% of the time

MongoDB Atlas vs Microsoft Azure SQL Database

Compared 12% of the time

Azure Database for PostgreSQL vs Microsoft Azure SQL Database

Compared 9% of the time

Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB vs Microsoft Azure SQL Database

Compared 7% of the time

Oracle Database as a Service vs Microsoft Azure SQL Database

Compared 5% of the time

More Microsoft Azure SQL Database Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Google Cloud SQL

January 2026

Download Google Cloud SQL product report

Buyer's Guide

Microsoft Azure SQL Database

January 2026

Download Microsoft Azure SQL Database product report

Overview

Google Cloud SQL is a fully-managed database service that makes it easy to set up, maintain, manage, and administer your relational PostgreSQL and MySQL databases in the cloud. Google Cloud SQL offers high performance, scalability, and convenience. Hosted on Google Cloud Platform, Cloud SQL provides a database infrastructure for applications running anywhere.

Google

Microsoft Azure SQL Database is a relational database-as-a-service that delivers predictable performance, scalability, business continuity, data protection, and near-zero administration to cloud developers and solution architects. This is the deep technical library for Azure SQL Database.

Microsoft

Sample Customers

BeDataDriven, CodeFutures, Daffodil, GenieConnect, KiSSFLOW, LiveHive, SulAm_rica, Zync

adnymics GmbH, LG CNS, Centrebet, netfabb GmbH, MedPlast, Accelera Solutions, Sochi Organizing Committee, realzeit GmbH

Buyer's Guide

Google Cloud SQL vs. Microsoft Azure SQL Database

February 2026

Free Report: Google Cloud SQL vs. Microsoft Azure SQL Database

Find out what your peers are saying about Google Cloud SQL vs. Microsoft Azure SQL Database and other solutions. Updated: February 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

881,455 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Google Cloud SQL vs. Microsoft Azure SQL Database report.

See our list of best Database as a Service (DBaaS) vendors.

We monitor all Database as a Service (DBaaS) 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.