We do data warehousing, and our clients are mainly large commercial Insurance providers in the United States.
Data Architect at a computer software company with 1,001-5,000 employees
Reliable and easy to use
Pros and Cons
- "It's easy to use and fairly intuitive. I do development and data analysis, so we do a lot of work with SSIS and SQL Job Scheduler. Deploying new databases is very simple with things like BACPAC."
- "One thing I don't like about SQL Server is the way they've set up security with users and groups. It just doesn't seem that intuitive to me. Adding some more explanatory information might help some."
What is our primary use case?
What is most valuable?
It's easy to use and fairly intuitive. I do development and data analysis, so we do a lot of work with SSIS and SQL Job Scheduler. Deploying new databases is very simple with things like BACPAC. You don't have to do all the scripting for the database, then all the tables, keys, etc. It takes all that out of your hands.
What needs improvement?
One thing I don't like about SQL Server is the way they've set up security with users and groups. It just doesn't seem that intuitive to me. Adding some more explanatory information might help some. Sometimes the documentation is a little thin, but the same could be said about a lot of products.
For how long have I used the solution?
I've been using SQL Server on and off since it first came out in the 1990s. Most of the people I've worked for are SQL Server shops.
Buyer's Guide
SQL Server
August 2025

Learn what your peers think about SQL Server. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: August 2025.
866,778 professionals have used our research since 2012.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
I can't really speak intelligently about that because I haven't been on any of the real big ones yet.
How was the initial setup?
The complexity of the initial setup really depends. Obviously, you're going to need to know a few things and there are different ways to do deployments. I like the BACPAC, which is one of the features that come with SQL Server. It's a nice feature to deploy. BACPAC really handles all of the configuration for you. If you use that, I don't think you really need to know too much. If we're talking about a small database that holds a few thousand records, it doesn't matter what you're doing. You can't make a mistake because it's just not big enough.
We do a lot of Azure-based on-demand type systems where we host the system or we host it in Azure. We do the work for them. So we don't really do a lot of those installs.
Which other solutions did I evaluate?
We're going a lot heavier into Azure and we're going to be dealing with lots of volume because insurance data is pretty voluminous. I think some of our clients don't like the idea of having one gigantic VM system to run the database. That's one reason why they're switching to Snowflake. We had to do some SSRS stuff in the past, and I think they're moving over to Power BI mostly.
What other advice do I have?
I'd probably rate SQL Server nine out of 10. I don't think I'd give anybody a 10, but I think nine's about the best I can do. In my experience, it's been reliable and easy to use.
Which deployment model are you using for this solution?
Public Cloud
Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer. Partner

Principal, Sr. IT Consultant at a consultancy with 51-200 employees
It is fairly easy to work with
Pros and Cons
- "It is fairly easy to work with. I like the high-availability options, like mirroring for example, and the high-availability groups."
- "The Management Studio is a pretty heavy piece of software, and it's sometimes slow. I would recommend making an express version of the Management Studio, which is lighter and has fewer features but is a little faster."
What is our primary use case?
We set up SQL Servers for developers who develop applications for data mining. Our clients are generally small or medium-sized businesses. There's also a SQL Server Express that many software vendors use to support their applications. That gets installed often—usually as part of the application installation.
What is most valuable?
It is fairly easy to work with. I like the high-availability options, like mirroring for example, and the high-availability groups. It's quite an interesting feature that enables high availability for the SQL Server. I think it's important. So that's the feature that I'm particularly interested in and it works pretty well.
What needs improvement?
The Management Studio is a pretty heavy piece of software, and it's sometimes slow. I would recommend making an express version of the Management Studio, which is lighter and has fewer features but is a little faster.
For how long have I used the solution?
"Using" is the wrong word. We mostly set it up for others. The last time we set up an SQL Server for a client was about a year ago.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
We haven't had any experiences. The software hasn't been unstable or glitchy in our environment so far.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
In terms of scalability, it would be closed to a high-availability group. So I would say it varies in scale.
What other advice do I have?
I would rate it nine out of 10. Nothing's perfect.
Which deployment model are you using for this solution?
On-premises
Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer. Partner
Buyer's Guide
SQL Server
August 2025

Learn what your peers think about SQL Server. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: August 2025.
866,778 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Group DWH and BI Senior Manager at Virgin Mobile Middle East and Africa
Low maintenance, helpful online community, and flexible
Pros and Cons
- "The SQL Server is low maintenance, it does not require advanced technical skills to maintain or use it as you might in other similar database solutions. You need some knowledge on how to access the solution and how to query it but it is fairly straightforward."
- "SQL Server could improve by enhancing the integration abilities, adding more inbuilt data security features, and simplifying the maintenance."
What is our primary use case?
We use SQL Server as a relational database mostly for the application backend activities and integrations.
What is most valuable?
The SQL Server is low maintenance, it does not require advanced technical skills to maintain or use it as you might in other similar database solutions. You need some knowledge on how to access the solution and how to query it but it is fairly straightforward.
What needs improvement?
SQL Server could improve by enhancing the integration abilities, adding more inbuilt data security features, and simplifying the maintenance.
For how long have I used the solution?
I have been using SQL Server for approximately 10 years.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
SQL Server is stable.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
The solution is scalable and flexible.
We have approximately 15 people using the solution in my organization.
How are customer service and technical support?
The technical support from Microsoft is good but we have learned and received the most help from the online community.
How was the initial setup?
The installation difficulty level depends on the use case and environment. For example, if you need to deploy it on multiple nodes or have large amounts of storage it could increase the difficulty level.
What about the implementation team?
We have a team of approximately five database administrators and application developers who handle the setup and maintenance of the solution.
What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?
There is a license required for the use of SQL Server and we are on an annual subscription.
What other advice do I have?
I rate SQL Server a nine out of ten.
Which deployment model are you using for this solution?
Hybrid Cloud
Disclosure: My company does not have a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer.
Senior Service Architect at a tech services company with 501-1,000 employees
Stable, great with other Microsoft solutions, and can scale
Pros and Cons
- "The solution is stable."
- "The performance is not always the best."
What is most valuable?
While I don't like SQL Server so much, the selection was for clients so we needed to utilize it. Of course, one thing is that as great with this and other Microsoft products is that it's quite well documented and there are also light versions available. If you need to do something, you can also try it somehow on your own computer and so on.
If I'm helping a client to define what they need to have or what they need to do in a public sector procurement process quite often we cannot fix the database as it would be limiting the competition. That's why we never rule out the SQL Server; it should be included as an option at this level.
The solution is stable.
I haven't had issues with sizing or scaling.
What needs improvement?
If it would be more powerful it would be pretty nice. The performance is not always the best.
Whenever we were setting up the databases, there were some character problems that did not exist on some of the other solutions. However, the exact issues are hard to recall and list. I prefer Linux solutions. That said, when we began the previous project, Microsoft SQL Server was not available for Linux platforms yet.
Nowadays, it's my understanding that there are different versions. I haven't been checking if the current versions are supporting Transact-SQL and stuff like that. I remember that when we had the first Linux-based SQL Servers were introduced, they were, of course, a bit limited from the feature point of view. Whenever it is Unix or Linux or whatever platform, it's easier to manage them and to handle them whenever you are doing remote work.
I'm not so big fan of the Microsoft platforms as a server. However, whenever it's needed then it's needed. If you are a consultant, you need to adjust your whole mindset to whatever it's needed.
For how long have I used the solution?
I've used the solution, approximately, for several years. However, there have been gaps. There are different phases, however, I could count something like seven years where I was in an architect position in any project where this server was utilized.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
For the needs we had for the client it was sufficient. Whatever we needed to have - whether more server or more virtual server, the performance for the platform wasn't as good as I would like. I'm not entirely satisfied.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
I haven't been utilizing the scale capabilities. I don't have a clear impression on that, however, for our purposes, we've never had an issue.
How are customer service and technical support?
I've never dealt with technical support. The databases were handled by the service provider or service operator of our clients. We have a public sector client and they have their partner who is handling or is responsible for the platforms. Therefore, if we had a problem with the platform, the right bureaucratic way to go about getting a resolution is that we contact the service provider they have. They probably contact Microsoft. The process is bureaucratic.
Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?
I'm also familiar with other servers such as Oracle. While we must do as the client wants or needs, if I could choose, I would probably utilize databases like Oracle or open-source databases more often. It depends on the cases. That said, quite often I'm in a position where I cannot suggest the technology, so I use what the client requests.
What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?
We didn't pay anything for it as it was provided for our client by the provider. I cannot say about the enterprise licenses or anything. When we began the work and we needed it for our own machines, I prefer the solutions which are available, of course, as open-source or are free. And Microsoft had this express version of their database which we can utilize as well. In that sense, it is okay, however, of course, in general, I don't know.
What other advice do I have?
I've been working for a client as a consultant so I'm helping them with deployments. With one client, we're using on-premises deployments. Our client has their own service provider or service operator so they have their own IT partner who is handling their databases. If I have understood it correctly, the databases were on-premises for our client, however, it's a bit complicated when you are having and dealing with large-scale public sector actors in Finland. There are plenty of kinds of players involved.
Whether or not I would recommend the solution depends. If you are utilizing some solutions where you need the Microsoft platform-based database, it's completely okay. And if you have, for example, the solutions where you have utilized Transact-SQL or whatever, it's okay. However, if you have this kind of situation where you can make your own choices freely, you have options. And if you're utilizing Java or C, et cetera, quite often the path or logic would go towards some of the databases on the Microsoft side.
There is no clear answer. Quite often when you begin to think about your solution or you think about what you are building, the database is the first thing you decide on. There are other factors too, such as a business case or if you're just building from scratch and so on and so on. I wouldn't like to say that I never would recommend it, however, if you are building everything from the scratch and you can make all the decisions, likely it is not the first option you have or I'd suggest.
I'd rate the solution at an eight out of ten.
Which deployment model are you using for this solution?
On-premises
Disclosure: My company does not have a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer.
Owner at 2 Bit
Very fast with reliable, easy-to-access data
Pros and Cons
- "For me, the initial setup is very easy as I have years of experience with the product."
- "With so much data, things can get slow, which is why I would like to be able to understand how to better optimize queries."
What is most valuable?
The solution is very fast.
The data is reliable and I can normalize the database and normalize the data so that I can collect whatever information I need. If I collect the data correctly, then I can share whatever report I want.
Normally, when the data is in the database, it will always be a long-term information holder, instead of putting it in Excel or something like a spreadsheet or something like that.
For me, the initial setup is very easy as I have years of experience with the product.
What needs improvement?
I could use some more guidelines about making the correct queries to understand the structure better. I'd like to have a better idea and to understand how to make a nice query, which is good for the system and good for the hardware.
Sometimes you have to have different data in different tables and you want to merge them into something together. I'd like to be able to do this in a different way.
Sometimes I need to have more optimization. I want to understand how can I optimize this or that? Especially now, when we're working with a lot of camera information, where we are using a lot of cameras for photogrammetry, we need to take this data and put it into the SQL Server and we would like to be more flexible with the data.
With so much data, things can get slow, which is why I would like to be able to understand how to better optimize queries.
Those who are not familiar with the solution can find the initial setup intimidating and difficult.
For how long have I used the solution?
I've been using the solution for 30 years at this point.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
I don't have so much experience with scaling. It's my understanding that that task is a specialist job.
How are customer service and technical support?
I have dealt with technical support in the past. I'm happy with them. They have been helpful.
Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?
I'm not only working with SQL Server. When I need the database, I will always do it in SQL Server or Maria Database or something like that.
How was the initial setup?
For me, the initial implementation is easy, however, I know a lot of people can't set it up and believe everything is hard. It's difficult if you didn't know how to do it. You have to know, in the beginning, how to define what hardware you need and how many disks, for example. You need to understand if it should be a cluster disk or not. Long ago, it used to be hard disk access only. Things have changed.
What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?
The solution does come at a cost.
What other advice do I have?
I'm a customer and an end-user.
This solution is one of my favorites and I would rate it at a nine out of ten. I'm very pleased with its capabilities.
Microsoft has a freeware option that might be called something like SQL Server Express. I'd advise new users to try to put that one up. It's easy to implement. If you need more data, then buy the correct server. The SQL Server is expensive, however, when you see how nice data is installed and how easy you can get access to it, it may be worth it. If new users need help, they can always go to YouTube to find answers for the freeware.
SQL Server has a steep learning curve, however, it's worth it to learn about it and understand it.
Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer. Partner
VP Global Information Technology at a insurance company with 10,001+ employees
A scalable and stable solution with a flawless setup
Pros and Cons
- "The initial setup is easy, flawless."
- "I want to see one improvement and this involves the replication between the DC and DR."
What is our primary use case?
We are using the latest version.
We can use the solution for the same application. On the database side we have Microsoft SQL and on the operating system side we have 2019.
What needs improvement?
I want to see one improvement and this involves the replication between the DC and DR. We have limited options at the moment and it does not lend sufficient support for the number of databases. This means we have a huge number of databases, topping approximately 2,000. For the moment, this particular replication is not supported by SQL.
The support number of databases needs to be increased, as well as the database number of databases that it supports. That support cannot be found when it comes to the replication between the DC and DR.
For how long have I used the solution?
I have been using SQL Server for ten years.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
The solution is sufficiently stable.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
The solution is scalable.
How are customer service and technical support?
When it comes to the speed, knowledge and customer-friendliness of the technical support, we feel these to be good.
Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?
We did not use other solutions prior to SQL Server.
How was the initial setup?
The initial setup is easy, flawless.
It lasts a single day.
What about the implementation team?
We handed the implementation on our own.
This involved a technical team of 15 people.
What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?
There is a need to pay for the license for SQL Server. We have an enterprise license, which we consider to be fine.
What other advice do I have?
We have 10,000 customers.
I would recommend the solution to others.
SQL Server is good and I rate it as a nine out of ten.
Which deployment model are you using for this solution?
On-premises
Disclosure: My company does not have a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer.
Senior Developer at a government with 51-200 employees
Easy to scale, simple to set up, and offers many great features
Pros and Cons
- "The backups are excellent."
- "I would like to see better integration between their link server and other platforms, such as IBM."
What is our primary use case?
Usually, we use a lot of the vendor software, like ManageEngine, and stuff like that. They use Postgres, however, I prefer to use Microsoft's SQL server. We have a couple of servers and we integrate that information into it. I can run reporting and analysis off of that.
What is most valuable?
There's a lot of great features. I like T-SQL, which is wonderful. The backups are excellent. There's a lot of things that are much easier to manage. All of the features and functions within the SQL language itself, the store procedures, I really, really enjoy. The security has been excellent.
The initial setup is very straightforward.
The stability is very good.
We find it easy to scale if we need to.
What needs improvement?
I would like to see better integration between their link server and other platforms, such as IBM, due to the fact that, a lot of times, you want to set up a linked server so you can be on SQL and pull data off of another server using that link server. Sometimes they don't play well together. There just needs to be better integration for those types of situations.
For how long have I used the solution?
I've been using the solution for about eight or nine years at this point.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
The stability is great. There are no bugs or glitches. it doesn't crash or freeze. It's very reliable. The performance is great.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
Scaling is easy if you need to do it. You simply set up a cluster and you can just grow it up.
In our organization, all the end-users are pretty much integrated into it and using it. As far as developers, there are two developers and me that are using it.
How are customer service and technical support?
We haven't used tech support as we used to have a business partner that wanted us to talk to them instead. Therefore, I can't speak to how helpful or responsive they would be if you need assistance.
Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?
Here at the company, they used Postgres, and what I didn't care about it was that it was okay, but it didn't integrate with a lot of the other applications. I felt Microsoft did a better job of that.
How was the initial setup?
The setup is pretty straightforward. The only thing that sometimes gets weird is if you have somebody that's needing an ODBC driver from another type of application back to the SQL server. It's usually that other application trying to figure out what it needs to connect to SQL. It's not really SQL's fault.
What other advice do I have?
We are customers and end-users.
We are using both the latest version and a previous version of the solution. I don't have the exact version numbers on hand.
I would advise new users first to get help implementing it unless you know the solution well, as there's so much that it can do. A lot of times you can actually make a little mistake. Say if you're going to go in a certain direction, if you get some advice, you may be much happier going in another direction completely.
In general, I would rate the solution at a nine out of ten. I've been quite satisfied with its capabilities. It's an excellent product that still has room for growth.
Which deployment model are you using for this solution?
On-premises
Disclosure: My company does not have a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer.
2de Solution Engineer - storage & compute at a financial services firm with 10,001+ employees
Scalable and stable with good overall performance
Pros and Cons
- "The scalability of the product is great."
- "The licensing is pretty expensive."
What is our primary use case?
We primarily use the solution mainly for databases on all types of applications.
How has it helped my organization?
SQL is the all around leading Database server
What is most valuable?
The solution is very stable.
The scalability of the product is great.
What needs improvement?
We'd like the deployment process to be better in the future.
The licensing is pretty expensive.
For how long have I used the solution?
I've been using the solution for 20 years at this point. It's been two decades. We've used it for a while now.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
The solution is stable and the performance is great. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
The product scales well. If you need to expand it, you can do so.
We have 900 to 1,000 people using it currently.
How are customer service and technical support?
I'm more on the architecture side and therefore do not directly deal with technical support. I cannot speak to how helpful or responsive they are.
Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?
We also use Oracle. We've used it for over a decade already.
How was the initial setup?
The deployment could be easier.
While the deployment only takes about 15 minutes, you have to follow up with a lot of configuration.
What about the implementation team?
We handled the implementation ourselves. We did not enlist the assistance of any integrators or consultants. It was all handled in-house.
What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?
We're paying too much for licensing at this time. They need to work on the pricing. They could be cheaper, however, it's also difficult to run the licenses in the right way.
We pay licensing fees on a yearly basis.
What other advice do I have?
We're a customer and an end-user. We don't have a business relationship with SQL.
While everything is currently on-premises, we're making moves to shift to the cloud.
We're using the 2019 and 2016 versions of the product.
I'd rate the solution at an eight out of ten. In general, we've been quite happy with its capabilities.
Which deployment model are you using for this solution?
On-premises
Disclosure: My company does not have a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer.

Buyer's Guide
Download our free SQL Server Report and get advice and tips from experienced pros
sharing their opinions.
Updated: August 2025
Product Categories
Relational Databases ToolsPopular Comparisons
Teradata
MySQL
Oracle Database
SAP HANA
MariaDB
IBM Db2 Database
CockroachDB
Amazon Aurora
LocalDB
Citus Data
Oracle Database In-Memory
IBM Informix
YugabyteDB
SAP IQ
Tibero
Buyer's Guide
Download our free SQL Server Report and get advice and tips from experienced pros
sharing their opinions.
Quick Links
Learn More: Questions:
- Microsoft sql2017 VS SAP Hana
- SQL Server 2005 vs. InfoBright - what are the pros and cons of these solutions?
- SQL Server 2012 - can I make OLTP transactions from my ERP run in memory?
- How does NuoDB compare to MySQL and SQL Server?
- What are the main architectural differences between Microsoft SQL Server and Oracle Multitenant?
- Would you say the price of SQL Server is high compared to that of similar products?
- Has using SQL Server helped your organization in any way?
- Which authentication mode is best for SQL Server?
- Which solution do you prefer: Microsoft SQL Server's enterprise edition or Oracle Database's enterprise edition?
- Which is better: SQL Server or SAP HANA?