We are using this solution as a database. The main purpose is as an SQL Server.
Head of IT, CTO at a insurance company with 51-200 employees
Reliable, scalable, and user-friendly but the pricing could always be better
Pros and Cons
- "It's much more friendly in comparison with Oracle."
- "I am fine with the pricing, but pricing is an area that can always be improved."
What is our primary use case?
How has it helped my organization?
Our backend and core systems are using Microsoft SQL Server. We have no complaints from anyone who is using it.
We have nothing that we can compare it with.
What is most valuable?
It's much more friendly in comparison with Oracle.
We are using the standard features. I don't see any areas that can be simplified with the standard functionalities. We don't use any special extended features.
From my point of view, using SQL Server 2017 and 2019 is very good. I haven't experienced any issues or been in a situation where I was struggling with problems for which I didn't have access to proper documentation or proper functions.
For how long have I used the solution?
I have been using SQL Server for eight years.
Buyer's Guide
SQL Server
March 2025

Learn what your peers think about SQL Server. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: March 2025.
861,803 professionals have used our research since 2012.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
After eight years in our company, we have not had any issues with SQL Server from a stability point of view.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
We are a small company. We don't have any issues with this and we are fully virtualized. If we need to, we can extend the amount of CPUs as we want.
Our core system is being used by 50 users, but they are not accessing the SQL Server. We have approximately 10 users in our company who are using the SQL Server.
How are customer service and support?
I have never used technical support.
Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?
I am using Avamar and Data Domain. I have been using Data Domain for four or five years. It was used as the data storage for the backup solution in our sister company.
I worked with Oracle in the previous company. Microsoft SQL Server is better.
We have also used Software Center, Active Directory, Microsoft Exchange, and almost everything that is Microsoft-based.
How was the initial setup?
It was installed by an outsourcing company. It is another sister company.
What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?
It's cheaper than Oracle.
I am fine with the pricing, but pricing is an area that can always be improved.
We are Microsoft D-level partners. Pricing is not an issue for us, because of the outreach of our mother company.
What other advice do I have?
We are a Microsoft-based company.
I would rate SQL Server a seven out of ten.
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

Digital Transformation Architect at Comdata
Very stable, user-friendly, easy to troubleshoot, and easy to manage databases
Pros and Cons
- "It is a very user-friendly solution. It is easy to manage the databases and troubleshoot any issue. It is a perfect solution for the volume or transactions that we need to manage."
- "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."
What is our primary use case?
We developed a product that is using five or six databases supported on SQL Server.
What is most valuable?
It is a very user-friendly solution. It is easy to manage the databases and troubleshoot any issue. It is a perfect solution for the volume or transactions that we need to manage.
What needs improvement?
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.
For how long have I used the solution?
I have been using this solution for ten years.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
It is very stable. I would rate it an eight out of ten in terms of stability.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
It is scalable. You can get scalability by using the link servers, or you can create another instance in another server and make a link with that server. It is very quick.
We have around 50 users of this solution.
How are customer service and technical support?
I have not interacted with them.
How was the initial setup?
Its initial setup is easy. It takes a week. One of the things that you need to pay attention to is the collection.
What other advice do I have?
It is a nice product. You can use it as you want. If you don't know how to use it, you will waste it. Oracle is more powerful than this, but it is great for our needs.
I would rate SQL Server 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.
Buyer's Guide
SQL Server
March 2025

Learn what your peers think about SQL Server. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: March 2025.
861,803 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Director at a tech services company with 10,001+ employees
Stable and able to process a lot of data, but it is expensive and integration needs improvement
Pros and Cons
- "Stability is one of the most valuable features."
- "Indexing, as well as integration, are areas of this product that need improvement."
What is our primary use case?
We use SQL Server to process a lot of data. We are using versions and 2015 and 2018.
What is most valuable?
We like the whole product and we use most of the features.
What needs improvement?
Indexing, as well as integration, are areas of this product that need improvement.
For how long have I used the solution?
We have been using SQL Server for approximately five years.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
It's a stable solution. Stability is one of the most valuable features.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
It's somewhat scalable.
How are customer service and technical support?
We don't have any issues with technical support.
Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?
We have used SQL Server from day one, along with OpenSQL. We used them both regularly.
We don't use Oracle often but we do have a few areas where it is used.
How was the initial setup?
The initial setup was straightforward.
We have experience and did find it to be challenging.
We do multiple deployments which require three or four teams.
What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?
The cost is high and because it's an expensive product, we are in the process of moving towards open-source solutions.
Which other solutions did I evaluate?
We have evaluated MongoDB and are in the process of transforming ourselves.
What other advice do I have?
We will continue using SQL Server for some things but not everything. Most of our applications will be migrated to MongoDB and others.
I am not in the position to recommend SQL Server to anybody. Rather, I am more in the area of quality assurance.
I would rate this solution a seven 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.
Manager Digital Technologies at a real estate/law firm with 51-200 employees
Easy to use, simple to configure, and has a straightforward setup
Pros and Cons
- "The solution has the capability to scale."
- "Microsoft doesn't have active-active load balancing scenarios. It's always a failover cluster."
How has it helped my organization?
Most of the application what we use today are SQL-based applications. If you take a Microsoft ecosystem, there are many tools that connect easily with SQL - especially when it comes to reporting and analytics. Power BI is one of the good examples which can easily connect to SQL and then you can pull any report you want. SQL itself has its own tools like reporting services and transformation services. It also helps you to generate reporting and analytics and data transformation.
Overall, it helps our organization a lot. Again, it depends on what requirements and company has, and for what purpose you are using it. However, from an application relational database point of view that we are using today, it helps due to the fact that it comes with all that we need. Also, from a performance point of view, it configures well.
What is most valuable?
When you use the solution with Azure, for example, you get very good scalability. You can scale fast, whether it is horizontal or vertical.
If we use the product as a PaaS, Platform as a Service, it comes with all the security features you need - including against DDoS attacks.
The product offers good bloc storage, which you can buy at an additional cost. This allows you to have large object storage if you need it.
Over a period of time, their split engine has evolved and in the latest version, they've done a lot. Even from the management tool perspective, a lot of things have been done. A lot of functions have been added.
The initial setup is pretty straightforward.
Technical support has been good.
The solution has the capability to scale.
The pricing isn't as high as other options.
SQL is very easy to use. That's a very good thing about it in general.
What needs improvement?
Microsoft doesn't have active-active load balancing scenarios. It's always a failover cluster. There is no active-active cluster, which other tools, other database providers like Oracle, provide. If Microsoft can consider or probably come up with an active-active cluster, then it would be good. It will be more powerful in a scenario like that.
The pricing, while not the most expensive, is still quite high.
They have something called Parallel Queries, however, I don't know how it works. I've never tested it in a horizontal way. I'd like to understand a bit more about it and be able to use it horizontally.
For how long have I used the solution?
I'm new to my organization and have only been using the product for three or four months here, however, previously, I worked with SQL for a long time.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
In terms of direct users, there are only a few. However, there are applications that are using SQL and those application's users are 100 plus, or maybe 300 to 400 plus users.
This company is in the phase of growth. If it grows as expected, then definitely the chances are high in terms of the number of users - which means we will scale up a bit.
How are customer service and technical support?
We have direct support from Microsoft. We have Microsoft partners as well. I don't see any problem with technical support, as we ourselves are capable of troubleshooting. I'm a certified BBS developer. If there any related issues, we take care of them internally. If not, we raise a ticket from Microsoft and we get support from them. They are helpful and responsive. We are satisfied with the level of service they provide.
How was the initial setup?
The solution is very straightforward. It's not too complex. A company shouldn't have an issue implementing it. Once you install everything and get it configured as per your requirements if you are an SQL professional and an administrator, it's very straightforward.
It's doesn't take too long to set up. Within a week you can get it deployed. If you do a standalone module, a week likely is not required. If it is in a cluster module, of course, within a week you can set up a cluster and then get things done.
What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?
SQL pricing is slightly high compared to where it was before. That said, compared to other products like Oracle, they are still cheap. It's not overly expensive in comparison to others.
The final price you can expect all depends on your requirements. A standard version of SQL is always cheaper than an enterprise. If you're going to go on a cluster, it's particularly expensive. However, when it comes to the value and what is provided, that is also important.
It all depends on what you need. I cannot just blindly say that it's expensive or cheap as it all depends on your requirement. Comparatively, SQL is cheaper than other products like Oracle. Oracle is really expensive compared to SQL.
What other advice do I have?
We are customers and end-users.
I'm certified in SQL. I have a pretty good understanding of the product.
Overall, I would rate the solution at a nine out of ten.
Whether or not it would work well for a company all depends on what purpose it is being used for. However, SQL is simple to use and simple to configure, and very powerful in terms of relational database and the SQL language and functions it comes with. If you configure it well and then use it well, the outcome will likely be very good.
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.
Chief Information Officer at a financial services firm with 501-1,000 employees
Good SSMS and profiling tools that work well for internal applications
Pros and Cons
- "I like that the new version has a memory-optimized table to improve the performance."
- "I would like to see the performance improved. Migrating should be easier and the scalability needs improvement."
What is our primary use case?
We use SQL Server for our internal applications.
What is most valuable?
Working with SQL Server, it is quite convenient to use the SSMS tools to write a profile. I also like the profiling tools.
I like that the new version has a memory-optimized table to improve the performance.
What needs improvement?
We had some difficulty doing the performance tuning when we migrated from the 2008 version to the 2016 version. We experienced a drop in the performance. We could not understand or figure out what caused the drop in performance. We did not change any settings to cause this effect. We tried to keep the same settings.
We feel that when running the 2008 version, it was much quicker in terms of performance.
That is an area of SQL Server that can be improved. Moving to a new version, you shouldn't have to change the configuration.
We have not been able to utilize it fully because it is not straightforward.
I would like to see the performance improved. Migrating should be easier and the scalability needs improvement.
For how long have I used the solution?
I have been using this solution for many years.
We are using version 2016.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
It's a stable product.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
In terms of scalability, it has some room for improvement.
We have 20 people in our organization who are using this solution.
How are customer service and technical support?
We don't usually get support from Microsoft. We get it from our software vendors or we try to do it ourselves.
We are somewhat satisfied with the support that we have received from the vendor, but not fully because of the issue we faced when we moved to a newer version. But in other areas, it's okay.
Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?
We have used SQL Server from the beginning.
How was the initial setup?
The initial setup was moderate. It was not easy but it was not difficult.
What other advice do I have?
I would rate SQL Server 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.
Business Solutions Architect at a real estate/law firm with 501-1,000 employees
Simple to deploy and manage, good reporting and analytical capabilities
Pros and Cons
- "The security and vulnerability management are well-managed through the vendor."
- "Linux-based editions are not yet proven to be on par with Windows deployments."
What is our primary use case?
We use this Relational Database Management System for Line of Business systems, including Enterprise Resource Planning, Data Warehouse, Web Applications, and Business Intelligence.
Solutions are procured, built, and enhanced in the REIT industry, FMCG ERP, distribution and warehousing, manufacturing systems, knowledge workers such as workflow and portals, web applications, custom developments areas, enterprise reporting and analytics for internal reporting, and decision support systems.
Integration solutions provide robust integration to various and disparate third-party systems.
How has it helped my organization?
This is a simple to deploy, own, and manage RDMS.
Skills and support for this product are widely available. The security and vulnerability management are well-managed through the vendor. Lifecycles are greatly improved in recent releases, to make upgrades easier.
A license buys enterprise-grade data integration, reporting, and analytical capabilities as well.
It has broad adoption and support for integration with leading software brands such as SAP and Sage.
Data availability and security is well taken care of for the enterprise and is the backbone of first-class business continuity plans.
What is most valuable?
Support and adoption are important because skills are available to lower the total cost of ownership.
High availability, read-only copy synchronization, and data integrity mean that it is relatively easy to ensure data security, availability, and integrity. Lower tier SKUs offer high-end features.
Data integration is available, as SSIS offers a flexible data integration platform with rich features including .NET integration for web-service integration, or bus architectures.
SSAS analytical DBs are powerful yet easy to develop and own.
SSRS offers enterprise reporting that is reasonably user-friendly.
It is easy to deploy cloud/on-premises hybrid implementations with a familiar and consistent toolset.
What needs improvement?
It is costly to implement high throughput systems, beyond millions of transactions per second. The hardware to run the systems, especially for high availability deployments is expensive, i.e. more resources to run.
Linux-based editions are not yet proven to be on par with Windows deployments.
Row-level security is obscure to implement.
Running cloud offerings are expensive; for example, the Instance as a Service offering.
Third-party tooling is required to manage code version control.
Managing BLOB data is not equally simple to implement.
The engine that implements query plans was updated in the 2012/2014 refresh that could necessitate a costly rewrite of queries.
For how long have I used the solution?
I have been working with SQL Server for 21 years.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
I have a very high opinion of the stability of the solution. It is one of the most mature products available.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
Best practice setup is important to consider but when implemented correctly, it just runs.
How are customer service and technical support?
The vendor is excellent and their relationship with Microsoft has proven invaluable. The 2008 > 2012 and 2012 > 2014 upgrades had specific issues that made them costly. Recent upgrades have been relatively painless.
Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?
We have tried using different technologies, depending on the use case. This is not the best tool for document-oriented or unstructured data.
How was the initial setup?
It is relatively simple to run. We spent a good amount of time preparing the requirements for a high-availability cluster that paved the way for a reasonably straightforward implementation.
What about the implementation team?
We had assistance from our vendor. We consider our vendor nimble and best in class. They contributed greatly to the stable running of the platform.
What was our ROI?
It is a positive ROI, especially in that we leverage many of the features in the offering.
What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?
With recent releases, the Standard Edition (cheaper) SKU has some of the earlier version Enterprise features. SQL Express has some limitations.
The Azure Platform as a Service option remains relatively expensive, at least in South Africa, compared to on-premises, but it is worth exploring.
Which other solutions did I evaluate?
Some baseline comparisons were made around 2012 to Oracle, with MS SQL Server coming out to have a lower total cost of ownership.
What other advice do I have?
It is a first-class enterprise RDBMS and will continue to enjoy favourable sentiment from developers and DBAs.
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.
Enterprise Architect at a educational organization with 10,001+ employees
Easy to set up and use, and the technical support is good
Pros and Cons
- "It is the latest technology and pretty powerful in terms of the high availability of the virtual server."
- "We have had problems implementing a data warehouse using SQL Server."
What is our primary use case?
We use SQL Server for our application data.
As a government agency, all of our data is stored in our environment on-premises.
What is most valuable?
SQL Server is easier to use than Oracle, programming-wise.
It is the latest technology and pretty powerful in terms of the high availability of the virtual server.
What needs improvement?
We have had problems implementing a data warehouse using SQL Server. It may be because the data is too big, although it claims to be able to handle the amount of data that we have. Perhaps there are some technical issues because there is something weird going on. It cannot find the correct IP address.
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?
This product is not quite as stable as Oracle. I would rate the stability as moderate and would not rate it ten out of ten.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
SQL Server claims to be good, scalability-wise, but we have had issues with it.
On the other hand, we have been using it for a lot of large applications and it has worked well in those cases. For the most part, it is good, and we have a lot of users.
How are customer service and technical support?
Microsoft technical support is good.
Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?
I also have experience with Oracle and I find that SQL Server is easier to work with, but it is not as powerful.
How was the initial setup?
Initially, it is easy to set up.
What other advice do I have?
My advice for anybody who is considering this product is that it is relatively easy to set up.
I would rate this solution 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.
Software Manager at a computer software company with 1-10 employees
I like the community where we can get good responses and replies to our questions
Pros and Cons
- "SQL Server is quite stable. And now we are using the Lattice 2017 version."
- "In some cases it is quite difficult, like the lack of ease of the replication and other issues. They have to improve on that. They do not have features like "always on," which is complicated."
What is our primary use case?
I handle the banking software. We have another software called City Life, a life insurance package. We develop those packages - the banking package and the life insurance package. We have almost 70 - 80% of the market share in our country. I also use and love Delphi. We develop in that language. The backend is SQL Server at this moment and we are researching how we can move from SQL Server to some other open source solutions.
What is most valuable?
The only problem with this product is that it doesn't have an open source version.
What needs improvement?
Our customers are willing to pay less. For SQL server they have to buy it, they have to purchase the license. So, if we can get some free open source, like Firebird, InterBase, Firebase, or something like MySQL and also PostgreSQL, whichever one is suitable for us, we'd like to pick one.
Additionally, in some cases it is quite difficult, like the lack of ease of the replication and other issues. They have to improve on that. They do not have features like "always on," which is complicated.
One feature which we don't like is that they are providing CLR, and CLR can only be written in dot net, C sharp. But actually it should be open for all languages to write CLR so that we can hide our code. The next thing is that the tangent PSQ is encryptable but it is decryptable, as well. From the developer's point of view, all procedures are exposed.
For how long have I used the solution?
I have been using SQL Server for a long time, since version 6.5.
We are still using it, but everybody is going towards open source, that's why we would like to go for open source as well.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
SQL Server is quite stable. And now we are using the Lattice 2017 version. But the most important thing is that the license cost is quite expensive.
How are customer service and technical support?
We solve issues on our own. If we need something we Google it and find it. There is a good communication base and a community where we can get responses, replies, and some blog posts.
What other advice do I have?
I'm looking at Firebird. My concentration is Firebird. I understood and researched that Firebird is the best one because it is quite robust, it has already matured, and the developer's community is quite high and stable. I'm just researching whether it can handle the huge amount of database as it did in Microsoft SQL server.
On a scale of one to ten, I would give SQL Server an eight out of 10.
Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer. reseller

Buyer's Guide
Download our free SQL Server Report and get advice and tips from experienced pros
sharing their opinions.
Updated: March 2025
Product Categories
Relational Databases ToolsPopular Comparisons
Teradata
MySQL
Oracle Database
SAP HANA
MariaDB
IBM Db2 Database
Amazon Aurora
CockroachDB
LocalDB
Citus Data
Oracle Database In-Memory
IBM Informix
YugabyteDB
SAP IQ
SAP Adaptive Server Enterprise
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?