Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

LocalDB vs MySQL vs SQL Server 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:
 

Mindshare comparison

As of July 2025, in the Relational Databases Tools category, the mindshare of LocalDB is 2.2%, down from 3.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of MySQL is 8.0%, down from 8.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of SQL Server is 16.9%, down from 22.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Relational Databases Tools
 

Featured Reviews

Srini-Dhanaraj - PeerSpot reviewer
The database always has structured data, like rows, columns, and bases
LocalDB is an excellent solution for learners, beginners, and projects of negligible size; it is very good. Any startup can use a local database to start. Once they grow beyond its limits, they can migrate to a MS SQL server that's also available on-premises. I rate it ten out of ten.
Muzzamil  Hussain - PeerSpot reviewer
Native encryption ensures secure data management with a simple deployment
The most valuable feature is the on-premises data encryption facilities. By default, we can provide encryption, and this feature in MySQL is why we prefer it over other databases. The native encryption in MySQL encourages us to use this database model more frequently compared to Oracle and other databases. With Oracle, we have to buy another solution for encryption and masking, but MySQL supports native encryption, which enhances our return on investment. It perfectly supports our ROI, and we have no issues with its functionality.
Kapil Dev Khatri - PeerSpot reviewer
Helps monitor queries and identify which indexes need to be created in the databases
SQL Server is very simple due to its GUI, which is available for users. It allows for modifications and has execution plans available, along with options such as activity monitoring. This helps monitor queries and identify which indexes need to be created in the databases, tables, or columns to improve performance.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"LocalDB is an excellent solution for learners, beginners, and projects of negligible size; it is very good."
"The initial setup is very straightforward. The guidelines are very easy to follow. Maintenance is very easy and requires very little manpower."
"The most valuable feature of LocalDBis the connection between the application and DB."
"The solution is fast."
"The initial setup was simple."
"The solution helps us perform with our databases and extract data."
"The way that MySQL has improved my organization is that it comes free and also works fine on the technical side."
"For starters, it's free, which is always nice, and it's also pretty straightforward to use. It's a nice conventional database."
"I am totally satisfied with MySQL."
"I like MySQL's feature that helps to automate things."
"The fact that it is free is what appeals to me the most."
"I like the JSON stuff."
"The speed is very good."
"A valuable feature of the solution is that it is comparatively simpler to manage than Oracle."
"Easy to implement and user-friendly relational database management system. This product is stable and scalable."
"We've found it to basically be pretty problem-free."
"The pricing of the product is very good."
"The support from Microsoft has been good."
"The performance of SQL Server is perfect."
"The solution's most valuable part revolves around data management, which can be seen in its audit features and performance."
"It is one of the most stable relational databases out there."
 

Cons

"The ALM features can be improved, but the database by itself is reliable."
"It is only for a small amount of data. Local DB is made for the purpose of small-volume optics."
"The solution needs to create a management tool. Right now, the solution has tools for creating a local installation, but it's too simplistic. We need something that's a bit more complex so that we can extend the tools with our scripts."
"The internal connection features of LocalDB could improve."
"The initial setup is complex and requires a skilled person."
"I find the Microsoft solution a bit better. But mostly in terms of the UI layout, I would say. I just find it a little bit more efficient."
"When I run into issues, I really have to research how to fix them."
"The auto-tuning and NDB cluster has some limitations regarding foreign keys."
"The workbench could be improved. In particular, error messages can be improved, which are horrific and completely unhelpful. I'd like to see improved parsing of errors. When you write SQL and it crashes, it usually is something completely irrelevant and not helpful. I've started to use GPT 3.5 for finding out how to do things. I got to do something a bit different, and that I found to be very useful. If there was some way to tie it into one of the new AI tools, that would probably be a good idea."
"The full-text search feature must be improved."
"It would be helpful if there were a graphical user interface to administer, configure, and tune it."
"Sometimes, I get lost in the toggles and buttons, and a better visual design would be nice. The layout is not user-friendly or efficient."
"In terms of what I'd like to see in the next release, one thing that's always missing is dash boarding. There's no real BI tool for MySQL, like there is in Yellowfin and all the different tools that you get. They all have MySQL connectors, but there's no specific BI tool for MySQL. These open source projects have sprung up, but they're more general purpose."
"The way to make cursors and manage raw data in rows can be improved. Currently, the way to construct or build these cursors is very hard, and you can waste memory. You need a highly skilled person to make it more efficient. It can also have support for Cubes, which is the organization of data in different dimensions by using MDX languages."
"In terms of improvement, it could use more integration with other products."
"Price could be cheaper, and access to reporting tools should be better."
"It may be a licensing issue, but sometimes its operating speed becomes slow if we have multiple users. It's lacking some performance, but it's acceptable because we have a heavy load."
"SQL could be improved by making all features available on the on-premise version of the product as well as the cloud version. When you buy the on-premise version, it's sort of an inferior product compared to the cloud version, which seems to get most of the latest and greatest features."
"The tool is expensive."
"Running multiple instances on the same box would be beneficial."
"The only item which I can list is application failure during Integration Services debugging, when restarting a process flow. In a number of instances the solutions fails. I have not given this much thought and simply stop and start the debugging service rather than restarting."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The licensing cost is too high for LocalDB."
"The fees are fair."
"We are using the free community version of the solution."
"We are using the licensed version of MySQL."
"There is not a license required for this solution."
"The pricing is not much expensive, it's cheap."
"It is open source. We prefer it for POCs because it saves the license cost."
"This is an open-source product that can be used free of charge."
"It's an open-source database management system that can be used free of charge."
"I don't pay for a license."
"The price could be better. Aside from the basic features, if you need any additional features that can be extended, for example, if you want to connect with the heterogeneous databases, they are being managed as separate services and not included in the package. If you manage a database in Azure, it's not providing SFS and reporting services. However, on-premises, if you purchase the SQL Server license, it includes SFIS and SFRS services. If you take Postgre SQL and MySQL, they provide almost all the same features even though they are both open source databases."
"My advice is quite straightforward. If you know the number of users who really and truly need access to the Server then it is a no-brainer. If you do not know, then get the basic package and minimum licenses and start from there. Needless to say, users can develop/use data structures outside and then deploy onto the Server."
"There is a license required for this solution."
"The licensing is on an annual basis."
"​It has the easiest licensing."
"The areas that need improvement are with regards to the commercial aspect of the solution, the licensing cost could be reduced in order to help customers to adopt it."
"The cost is high and because it's an expensive product, we are in the process of moving towards open-source solutions."
"It is expensive in terms of licensing costs and pricing. If you want to scale SQL Server, it is very expensive. We probably have to pay extra for technical support. We also have to pay for the license of Windows on which the SQL Server resides, which is an extra cost."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Relational Databases Tools solutions are best for your needs.
860,592 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
14%
Computer Software Company
13%
Government
11%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Computer Software Company
16%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Government
6%
Educational Organization
28%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Computer Software Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with LocalDB?
Technically speaking, you don't need to get any updates because it's not online. It's on-premise. So once it is insta...
What is your primary use case for LocalDB?
There were multiple systems, some planned, like the mainframe, the gold database, a website, and a manual Excel sprea...
Why are MySQL connections encrypted and what is the biggest benefit of this?
MySQL encrypts connections to protect your data and the biggest benefit from this is that nobody can corrupt it. If y...
Considering that there is a free version of MySQL, would you invest in one of the paid editions?
I may be considered a MySQL veteran since I have been using it since before Oracle bought it and created paid version...
What is one thing you would improve with MySQL?
One thing I would improve related to MySQL is not within the product itself, but with the guides to it. Before, when ...
Would you say the price of SQL Server is high compared to that of similar products?
SQL Server is fairly priced because it has various editions, depending on the number of users, servers, or core packs...
Has using SQL Server helped your organization in any way?
SQL Server has helped my organization through partitioning to distribute the workload, as it splits them up into smal...
Which authentication mode is best for SQL Server?
My company connects through SQL Server authentication. We have company Windows accounts, but we do not want to connec...
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

No data available
No data available
Microsoft SQL Server, MSSQL, MS SQL
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

AstraZeneca, Kienzle Automotive GmbH, Kodak Alaris, Unilever, Floatel International and Kongsberg Maritime, MyHero
Facebook, Tumblr, Scholastic, MTV Networks, Wikipedia, Verizon Wireless, Sage Group, Glassfish Open Message Queue, and RightNow Technologies.
Microsoft SQL Server is used by businesses in every industry, including Great Western Bank, Aviva, the Volvo Car Corporation, BMW, Samsung, Principality Building Society, Wellmark Blue Cross and Blue Shield, and the Catholic District School Board of Eastern Ontario.
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, Oracle, SAP and others in Relational Databases Tools. Updated: June 2025.
860,592 professionals have used our research since 2012.