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

Oracle MySQL Cloud Service vs SQL Server comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 4, 2025

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

Oracle MySQL Cloud Service
Ranking in Relational Databases Tools
14th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
21
Ranking in other categories
Open Source Databases (11th)
SQL Server
Ranking in Relational Databases Tools
1st
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
275
Ranking in other categories
Database Management Systems (DBMS) (2nd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of September 2026, in the Relational Databases Tools category, the mindshare of Oracle MySQL Cloud Service is 1.3%, up from 0.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of SQL Server is 10.3%, down from 15.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Relational Databases Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
SQL Server10.3%
Oracle MySQL Cloud Service1.3%
Other88.4%
Relational Databases Tools
 

Featured Reviews

RS
Director at Adamos Tecnologia
Efficiently manages extensive datasets with rapid connections and wide tool support
Oracle MySQL Cloud Service is easy to manage and install. It does not require a DBA for management. The connections are very fast and it supports several thousand users simultaneously without any issues. New connections do not hang server operations. As soon as new releases are put out, they work as expected. Oracle MySQL Cloud Service is supported by every vendor and tool, including architectural, integration, and generation tools, offering wide protocol support. This makes Oracle MySQL Cloud Service a valuable solution.
Peter Larsson - PeerSpot reviewer
Data Warehouse Lead at Resurs Bank AB (publ.)
Ledger and seamless integrations have strengthened trusted analytics and unified workloads
SQL Server's high availability and disaster recovery features work for supporting mission-critical applications, but there is much more to wish for. These features are not quite ready yet, although they do function. However, they could be significantly better. High availability and disaster recovery features should be improved in the next releases. I have noticed that everything could be improved or enhanced in the future, particularly temporal tables and window functions. Sometimes, I believe Microsoft releases features to stay ahead of competitors, but they do not make them feature-rich or feature-complete. They release something to be ahead of leaders and then seem to forget to maintain and upgrade them. I want Microsoft to pay more attention and be more mindful about the things they implement. It is fine to do a first release that works, but you cannot simply abandon it in the following years without service packs and improvements. You must continue to build on features rather than forgetting about them.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The solution overall is very, very good. It's got good integration with other databases and adds new features often."
"The initial setup was straightforward."
"It is an established open-source database with a vast array of resources available, ensuring you can learn everything needed."
"The product is good for tuning."
"My advice to anybody who is researching this solution is that it is a better option than other solutions."
"The access to a suite of management and administration tools that simplify tasks such as database provisioning, configuration, and monitoring."
"Overall, I rate Oracle MySQL Cloud Service as a nine out of ten."
"The most valuable features of the solution stem from the fact that it is flexible and is an open-source product."
"As an engineer working for multiple organisations, MS SQL has proven stability and operational power."
"It has always been reliable and consistent, providing tremendous functionality for many years."
"The solution can be deployed in a few minutes."
"One of the best features of SQL Server is the efficient retrieval of information."
"SQL Server scales well."
"I value the ability it gives me to test on small machines and easily scale up to larger devices for live applications."
"The support from Microsoft has been good."
"It provides the best performance and an easy way to monitor and troubleshoot problems."
 

Cons

"The support is not that great. They're not really supporting directly anymore and relying on experts to figure out technical issues."
"The product has many bugs."
"They could include more advanced features like clustering and replication in the Oracle databases."
"Sometimes, we face syntax issues with the solution."
"The technical support is in need of improvement."
"Improvement could be made in the workflow, particularly when it comes to making changes or implementing certain functions."
"The user interface is not simple."
"The tool’s stability must be improved."
"I would like to see SQL Server add the ability to write to multiple sites or support replication between multiple sites at the transaction level."
"The tool needs to improve its pricing and technical support."
"Overall, trying to make over with Oracle, it can be improved in usage for high data migration companies of large scale."
"The solution could offer more integration with other platforms."
"I'd like to see a simplification of the query optimizer and feel that SQL needs to look into the internal processing of the query because the query optimizer sometimes uses a different query plan, which we don't expect."
"The integration could be better. They are not open-source, so the integration with other platforms is not that easy."
"I have no choice, our customer choose MS SQL."
"It would be ideal if the solution offered better integration capabilities."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The solution’s paid plans are expensive."
"Oracle has a better licensing model compared to its competitors."
"The license is expensive."
"While the core solution itself is not exorbitant, the support services are associated with a significant maintenance fee, often ranging from twenty to thirty percent."
"The product is free since it is an open-source tool."
"The product is expensive."
"It is an open-source product."
"There is a license required for this solution. One of the problems is for smaller businesses to purchases a license because it is expensive for a lot of them to afford."
"The product is expensive."
"For a brief period, approximately one year before 2018, I had experience working with the open-source version of SQL Server. During that time, I found SQL Server to be the preferred choice, in my opinion."
"For medium-sized customers who don't need some enterprise features, the tool would be available for 200 USD per month. For the enterprise segment, the tool's cost can go up to 6,000 USD."
"We purchased our license and the pricing is fine for us."
"Pricing is reasonable for small organizations, but the scaling increases the price."
"I would rate the tool's pricing a six out of ten. It is not extremely cheap but also it's not the most expensive product."
"It's cheaper than Oracle."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Relational Databases Tools solutions are best for your needs.
914,394 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Comms Service Provider
14%
Outsourcing Company
11%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Construction Company
7%
Financial Services Firm
35%
Outsourcing Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
6%
Construction Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business8
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise12
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business119
Midsize Enterprise60
Large Enterprise119
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Oracle MySQL Cloud Service?
I have never paid for the full version of Oracle MySQL Cloud Service. We use the free version or the version available in RDS ( /products/amazon-rds-reviews ) from AWS ( /products/amazon-aws-review...
What needs improvement with Oracle MySQL Cloud Service?
Oracle MySQL Cloud Service should be easier to replicate and integrate into further solutions. Although it targets Linux and UNIX environments, its performance is not as optimized on Windows platfo...
What is your primary use case for Oracle MySQL Cloud Service?
I work in finance, financial services, banking, and financial services.
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 you are using. If you compare the product to others in this category, the price...
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 smaller pieces so the machines can easily deal with it. However, this comes with a h...
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 connect the two, out of security concerns and to keep things separated for our own pur...
 

Also Known As

No data available
Microsoft SQL Server, MSSQL, MS SQL
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Omnis, Naveex, Rehash 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 Oracle MySQL Cloud Service vs. SQL Server and other solutions. Updated: September 2026.
914,394 professionals have used our research since 2012.