Microsoft Azure SQL Database Reviews

We use Microsoft Azure SQL Database to extract HR-related data from SAP and Dayforce, like salaries and employee information. This also involves maintaining different environments for previous ERP systems like AX Dynamics and transitioning to SAP in 2022. We have development databases for unvalidated or unapproved data, as well as production databases.

Microsoft Azure SQL Database has significantly improved our operations by allowing us to extract data and generate comprehensive reports in Power BI. This enables a high-level overview of our operations, which helps us look at the entire picture instead of analyzing individual orders line by line. This increased accessibility to data enhances productivity.

The ability to maintain different environments, such as development and production databases, is valuable. The ability to use the same interface when connecting to on-premises databases or data lakes is very convenient. It's easy to use Azure SQL. Writing queries is the same as on-prem SQL. 

Azure SQL's ability to power next-generation AI applications is pretty nice. They're doing previews now for all that stuff in Fabric, so I could take all the data from there instead of Power BI reports. We don't use that for machine learning.

Azure SQL integrates very well with other Microsoft applications. We have to take date from on-prem servers and forklift it into the cloud, which is pretty simple once you have it all set up. After that, it's copy and paste.

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 company has used Azure SQL for three or four years, while I have used the solution for around two years.

Overall, the stability is satisfactory. Even with a large amount of data, performance is generally quick. Adding an index resolves any speed issues that might arise.

Azure SQL's scalability is excellent, particularly when using Azure Data Factory for data transfer. Despite mainly storing the database, it is efficient for transactional purposes.

Migration isn't simple when doing some things in the cloud, like importing Excel data or workbooks. It's a lot easier with on-prem stuff than in the cloud. That would be a bigger hoop to jump through now. After you do it once, you understand what you need to do the next time.

The use of Microsoft Azure SQL Database has not significantly reduced total cost of ownership due to the manual process required for moving data out of SAP. However, it enhances productivity by allowing power users to manage data independently.

I rate Azure SQL Database eight out of 10.

The only use case I have for the Microsoft Azure SQL Database is this data lake. The client decided that they want to concentrate all integrations between systems on the Azure SQL Server on the cloud to just be the repository of the interface. Every system that needs to transfer data from each other puts the information on the data lake on the SQL Server, and the other system gets it from there. I believe that's not a good solution, but the client wants to do it this way.

The Microsoft Azure SQL Database performs effectively, and if money is not a problem, you can scale. It can grow, and with a click of a button, you can add more memory and more CPU. This is a good feature if you need it and if you have the resources to invest in these capabilities.

The initial setup for the Microsoft Azure SQL Database is straightforward, as with all Microsoft tools. It's usually easy to set up and get running. Management is consistent, which is beneficial. You can manage your Azure instance with the same tools, Management Studio, from your computer. You can treat it as a box in your house.

I have used the Microsoft Azure SQL Database for two years now, and I don't find it satisfactory. It's slow and expensive.

The Microsoft Azure SQL Database is not the latest version of Microsoft SQL Server. I believe it's a really old engine that does not have the newest features. It's very slow and too expensive. I really don't think it's a good solution for most cases, except when you specifically need to put your data on the cloud.

Regarding stability, the Microsoft Azure SQL Database is very stable, but I noticed very poor performance. My client bought a specific configuration with some memory and two cores only. This configuration performs very badly compared to the same situation on-premises. Even if I put my SQL Server on an old machine, I will get better performance from the hardware on-premises.

There are problems with connection, and I believe most clients would be better served by a database on-premises. There is also an issue with extracting data - you cannot do a backup and dump the database to your local network. You need to rely on Microsoft backups to restore your data and pay for it. I really think that the data belongs to the client, and the client should always have the ability to download their data.

I have used the Microsoft Azure SQL Database for two years now, and I don't find it satisfactory.

The pricing for the Microsoft Azure SQL Database is expensive, though I don't have the current numbers as I saw these figures more than a year ago when preparing the environment. The client is already planning to move back on-premises because it is not working well in terms of performance. Now that we are starting to move big volumes of data, the system starts to slow down. Queries are slow, and the performance is now impacting the application.

I would rate the Microsoft support for this product as poor because we did not use it. The client just pays for the storage. We have some kind of built-in support, but we never used it as we try to figure things out by ourselves. In Brazil, this is a little bit more complicated. They have used the support from Microsoft for other products. They have Microsoft Windows 365 and volume licensing with Microsoft. They use their support, and I know that it works. On the database part, I didn't use it.

In general, I would give Microsoft support a rating of six out of ten.

The initial setup for the Microsoft Azure SQL Database is straightforward as with all Microsoft tools. It's usually easy to set up and get running. Management is consistent, and you can manage your Azure instance with the same tools, Management Studio, from your computer.

My client does not use Amazon services at all, including the Azure Data Box.

I am not familiar with just the Data Lake Storage because we are just using the SQL Server database, not the other products that are supposed to be dedicated to this kind of use of a data lake.

The Microsoft Azure SQL Database is not the latest version of Microsoft SQL Server. It's a really old engine that does not have the newest features. It's very slow and too expensive. I really don't think it's a good solution for most cases, except when you specifically need to put your data on the cloud.

The client is already planning to move back on-premises because it is not working well in terms of performance. Now that we are starting to move big volumes of data, the system starts to slow down. Queries are slow, and the performance is impacting the application.

On a scale of one to ten, I rate this solution a six.

We use SQL Server to hold most of our data, including orders and invoices that we're currently syncing with. We also have some customer and location data, which are the main uses.

It's easy to work with large amounts of data, query it, and bring it back to a visualization tool to show it to the end users.

The ease of use of SQL Server is among the most valuable aspects. Coming from a Microsoft background, it is especially easy to connect and work with SQL Server. Developing .NET applications is easier with SQL Server as a background. The ability to easily integrate with other Microsoft applications has also helped.

One area for improvement is data virtualization. Companies use different data sources, creating a separate data virtualization layer, and there are more data sources behind that layer. For example, we have different data layers for Excel, SQL Server, PostgreSQL, etc. Creating a data virtualization layer would help because you retain the metadata of your source data. 

There are many things in the back. If I want to query millions of rows in the background and have five sources. I must join those sources to the left or right and optimize the result. We cannot pull five million records, store them in a table, and query those. It will be a problem and time-consuming. We want instant data. 

I have used SQL Server since I joined the company five years ago.

The availability and latency have been pretty good.

SQL Server has the ability to scale workloads effectively.

Expertise and knowledge from Microsoft were important to us when considering servers.

Positive

It has helped considerably reduce our total overhead cost, but I do not have the exact numbers.

I rate Microsoft Azure SQL Database 10 out of 10. 

Our primary use case for Microsoft Azure SQL Database is storage configuration. We store all our connector configurations in the database, ensuring seamless operational integration.

Microsoft Azure SQL Database is easy to use and allows for rapid deployment.

While integrating the AI app with Azure SQL Database is a consideration, it's more for configurations. I believe the next steps should involve exploring search indices and technologies like Fabric.

This solution has had a certain impact on our organization. It has reduced our total cost of ownership because we don't have to spin up an environment just to contain SQL. All our databases now run in Azure, eliminating the need for on-premises instances.

Microsoft SQL Server seamlessly integrates with other Microsoft applications and is the central repository for all our connector configurations.

Microsoft Azure SQL Database has significantly reduced our total cost of ownership by eliminating the need for a dedicated environment to host SQL. Migrating all databases to Azure and removing on-premises instances has resulted in approximately a 70 percent reduction in TCO.

Valuable features of Microsoft Azure SQL Database include its quick deployment capabilities, the ability to spin up an environment easily, and seamless integration with Microsoft products. The transition to Azure SQL has certainly reduced our organization's total cost of ownership as it negates the need for on-premises infrastructure. The recent announcement about Copilot spinning up and creating SQL tables and stored procedures indicates the continuous improvement and added value it brings.

There needs to be a hybrid model for situations where not all customers want a cloud-based SQL solution. This model would facilitate transitions from on-premises instances to cloud-based versions.

I have been using Microsoft Azure SQL Database for about 15 years.

The overall stability is good as it functions smoothly for our organization's needs.

The latency and availability of Microsoft Azure SQL Database can be problematic when connecting to an instance in a geographically distant location. For example, connecting from New York to an instance in Australia can result in network issues. Therefore, it is preferable to provision an instance local to the connection point to optimize performance and minimize latency.

Microsoft Azure SQL Database allows easy scaling up and across without the need for physical infrastructure adjustments.

We did not switch from another solution because we are a Microsoft-oriented company and have seamlessly used Microsoft products for many years.

Azure SQL Database has helped reduce our total cost of ownership because we don't have to spin up an environment just to contain SQL.

I would rate Microsoft Azure SQL Database as a solid eight out of ten due to the room left for improvement. Microsoft has potential areas for enhancement and always seeks growth.

The migration of our database to Microsoft Azure SQL proceeded smoothly without challenges. This strategic business decision to transition from on-premises to Azure SQL was proactively incorporated into our roadmap.

Our organization utilizes Microsoft Azure SQL Database to support our Dynamics 365 business suite, and we also leverage Azure Virtual Machines for deploying SQL Server instances to accommodate other applications.

Microsoft Azure SQL Database runs naturally, allowing us to use it as a service without worrying about infrastructure or deploying servers. This has improved deployment speed as it's one less server to deploy, freeing up time for us.

We utilize Azure Hybrid Benefit daily as it provides a framework for deploying business applications within cloud-based virtual machines. This approach significantly reduces deployment time, requiring only a few clicks and a few hours of waiting before the virtual machine is ready for development and testing.

Azure SQL Database integrates well with other Microsoft products, which is critical.

Azure SQL Database offers strong performance, effectively managing tasks like tuning and indexing, which eliminates manual optimization and frees up our time for other priorities.

Azure SQL Database has significantly reduced our total cost of ownership. By utilizing it as a service, we have eliminated the need for physical servers and their redundant counterparts, which were previously necessary.

We use SQL Server as the back end for indexing performance.  

We appreciate that Microsoft Azure SQL Database supplies reliability and efficiency with its infrastructure, which is very beneficial to our organization. Furthermore, by using it as a service, we improve load scalability without experiencing major performance issues.

In terms of improvement, making Microsoft Azure SQL Database faster would cater to big companies that require speed. Additionally, having more statistics to help improve queries would be beneficial.

I have been using Microsoft Azure SQL Database for ten years.

We have not encountered any stability issues with Microsoft Azure SQL Database. Our relatively small customer base may contribute to this positive experience, but so far, the Azure SQL Database has performed excellently with no latency issues.

Azure SQL Database's ability to scale loads is a significant benefit.

We had a physical server with a redundancy server in the past, and now with Microsoft Azure SQL Database, that requirement is lessened.

The deployment of the Microsoft Azure SQL Database required additional configuration to establish connections and access data due to enhanced security measures. However, once operational, it functions similarly to a standard SQL Server.

Microsoft Azure SQL Database is not cheap.

I would rate Microsoft Azure SQL Database an eight out of ten. We should get more statistics to improve query performance. The SQL database is tied with Dynamics, so no other databases are viable.

We are not using Azure SQL Database much with AI, but it looks promising, and we are looking forward to those capabilities. 

Our primary use cases are logging for behavioral analysis similar to Google Analytics and transaction logging for our web pages for customers.

We use Azure Hybrid Benefit because we're a legacy company, and we have a SQL database from many years ago. We are migrating some databases to the cloud have seen a nice reduction in costs using this hybrid benefit. Shifting our corporate programs to the cloud is more or less the same due to the ease of implementation. We've cut costs by around 70 percent. 

Azure SQL is easy and feels similar to on-premise systems. The cloud solution is effortless to set up.

One area for improvement is setting up logs, especially for servers like VM SQL. It was also tricky to connect services on VNets to on-premise. We also had difficulty integrating some Azure resources. For example, app services in Azure Kubernetes may be difficult to integrate if these servers are on a VNet.  Semantic search or vector search should be enabled by default.

We have been using Azure SQL Database for about two years.

Azure SQL's latency was amazing with local data storage, but we had challenges using external tables in packets and delta tables. We're facing some high latencies, about one or five seconds for small packets delta tables. This could be improved.

We haven't utilized workloads for Azure SQL Database's scalability. We employ stored procedures for processing alongside database externals, making scalability less tested on our end.

The Microsoft support plan has a one-hour SLA, which was crucial in our decision-making process regarding database options.

Positive

We previously used VM SQL and have SQL Managed Instance now. We are not using Azure SQL database to power AI applications. We use NetGood Database SQL 2025 to search.

We had to migrate some legacy SQL databases to the cloud. The process went smoothly.

We reduced our TCO using Azure SQL.

I would rate Microsoft Azure SQL Database eight out of 10. If VNet integration was improved, I would rate it higher. The integration with VNets was a critical issue.

I use Azure SQL for reporting on data that I've collected for administration purposes.

Azure SQL improves my personal productivity because I can have a larger database.

The toolset is familiar to me since I've used SQL Server on-premises for quite a few years. Azure SQL Server integrates with other Microsoft applications very well.

Azure SQL had a bit of a learning curve to start, but it was fairly simple once I understood how to develop it. I was using PowerShell to connect to it, and I've never connected to online databases through Azure using PowerShell. Scripting the PowerShell connections could be simpler. The coding is familiar, but figuring out how to use it initially can be easier.

I have been using Azure SQL for about a year.

It seems like the stability is getting there.

I have not seen any issues with scalability. My database is not huge, but it's not small. It handles it quite well and is pretty fast.

I used some product documentation for PowerShell scripting. Other than that, I didn't reach out to support or any of our TAMs.

Positive

Familiarity was the reason for choosing SQL. I knew SQL, so that's what I preferred to do. SQL seemed to be the one with familiarity and price as key factors.

Our environment has a lot of security, so we have to open channels and configure the prerequisites for connectivity. Before you start implementing, you need everything to be set up. 

I'd give Microsoft Azure SQL Database a nine out of ten.

The primary use case is working for a government client that receives a lot of data and information from all the states. They process these documents using Azure and Power Virtual Agents to retrieve information and store it in Azure SQL. Previously, we used it for .NET applications, and some of our core applications involved SharePoint, which has an SQL back end. The solution has a broad range. 

Due to the continuous influx of data, we chose Azure SQL for faster processing. SQL Server has significantly improved organizational operations. Previously, managers had to manually review and manage thousands of records weekly, which is a slow process. 

SQL Server's ability to automate data processing and validation through virtual agents and integration with other Microsoft applications like Power Virtual Agents and Azure SQL has dramatically improved efficiency. It has expedited the data processing and validation, allowing managers to focus on strategic tasks.

The Power Virtual Agents help us go through documents and load data into SQL.

The next stage is to create chatbots for customers to send us information. This automation has been a fantastic improvement over previous manual processes

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.

We have used Azure SQL for around four years.

One reason we chose Azure SQL was its scalability. We started with a few gigabytes of data, but we anticipate growth once we integrate chatbots and AI features, making Azure's scalability features like Elasticity essential.

We had a positive experience with Microsoft support during implementation.

Positive

The installation was smooth. We faced a few minor challenges on the government level with opening the firewalls for SQL to communicate with our applications. The cloud implementation is straightforward. 

The Microsoft FastTrack team played an integral role in the implementation, providing valuable guidance and expertise.

Data from SQL was previously pulled for different applications built on Java by creating APIs. We also prefer SQL because we have existing enterprise licenses with the government.

I would rate Microsoft Azure SQL Database nine out of 10.