SQL Server Reviews

We manage backups for our customers, so we are not developers and we don't use SQL to provide a service. We are a managed service provider focused more on IT support and SQL configuration. So we don't use SQL as a product by ourselves. Instead, we provide instructions for how to back up SQL and do maintenance on it for our customers who need a SQL server for their CRM and ERP products. Their products need to have a SQL server to use in order to use their services. So we handle the maintenance for our customers.

Microsoft has a very broad landscape of products that they provide—almost everything that you need. SQL Server is widely used and it's simple. You cannot do without Microsoft if you want to manage IT for a business customer. And even if you don't like Microsoft, you should know how to use it because just about every customer uses Microsoft, so you have to use it. So it doesn't matter if I like it. It's everywhere, so you have to know how to use it.

I've been using Microsoft SQL Server for 25 years now.

We are a reseller of Microsoft. We also signed the SPLA agreement, which stands for Services Provider License Agreement. So we are able to use Microsoft products in our data center in order to provide cloud services to our customers.

I rate SQL Server nine out of 10.

I am a professional and I use this SQL Server in different companies. One of the companies I worked for was in the automotive industry. They had automobile products which they developed the SQL Server and database. At that time it was the first time I used SQL Server. I have also used Suprema which is a biometric system that also had an SQL Server. Our main products for data we have used SQL Server. However, my main application is developed on Oracle and MySQL, not any other database solution.

All of our systems use this solution, it can control security, data management, and integration. 

Many developers like SQL Server.

The solution could improve by having more integration with other operating systems and other platforms.

I have used SQL Server within the past 12 months.

SQL Server is stable.

The solution is scalable.

I have used MySQL.

If you follow the restoration policy, the installation is not a problem. If you want connectivity in the application then you have to open the ports and configure them. Otherwise, I'm very pleased it is very simple.

I can do the implementation myself.

SQL Server is under a license from Microsoft.

I would not recommend this solution.

I rate SQL Server a six out of ten.

The main use of this solution is to control and manage data storage information.

I would like the SQL Server to be able to provide cloud support. We use the solution with a Korean provider supporting only MySQL rather than Microsoft SQL Server, which would be preferable and cheaper. This would prevent us from having to pay for troubleshooting and hosting the server.

I have been using the solution for approximately two years. 

The solution is stable. 

I find the solution not to be scalable. 

There are approximately six people in our company using SQL Server.

I have not needed to contact technical support.

The initial setup was straightforward. 

I did the implementation of the solution myself, it does not require any consultants or integrators.

I rate SQL Server a six out of ten. 

The solution is primarily used as a relational database. It's a great option for anyone who needs to still use a database.

The solution is very common. It's easy to use.

The product offers a lot of support. Technical support has been great.

It's a reliable solution currently in this space.

The solution doesn't take a long time to set up. It's pretty straightforward. 

The solution is expensive. The licensing costs are high. 

I've been dealing with the solution for 20 years or so. It's been two decades. I've used it for a while. 

The stability is pretty good. I find it to be reliable. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. The performance is good.

We have 150 users on the solution currently.

I've contacted Microsoft technical support in the past and have been satisfied with the level of service I get. They're good.

We have a special database team that is running. Except for the initial installation of the hardware, they are doing everything as it's an in-house solution.

It took a day or two to implement. It might have even taken less time. 

We have a team that can manage the implementation process. 

The licensing is a bit expensive. We'd like them to be more flexible in terms of costs.

We pay a yearly licensing fee.

We did not evaluate other solutions before implementing this solution. 

I'm using either the 2018 or 2019 version of the solution. I don' know the exact number off-hand.

I'd rate the solution at an eight out of ten. It's a very good solution and I've been pretty happy with its capabilities. 

I would recommend the solution to other users.

We only use it as a logging solution. We use it as logging for processing our database. It holds records for some systems and so on. That's it.

The solution is stable.

The product is scalable.

The solution is configurable. 

The IT and digital transformation department are a bit fresh in this company that I am working for. They have a lot of plans, a lot of visions. I don't know how are they are going to do the infrastructure. I don't know their vision.

So far, the solution fits the scope of our company. We aren't missing any features. 

The integration could be better. They are not open-source, so the integration with other platforms is not that easy.

The company has been using them for a long time. I newly joined the company two months ago, so I don't know when exactly they start using it.

The solution is very stable. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. 

You can scale the product. You can increase and decrease the storage as needed. It's very easy.

The amount of users on the solution is anywhere between 1,000 and 2,000 users. 

While I've never been in touch with technical support, the administration team has. They've contacted the team in Egypt. I haven't heard of any negative experiences.

I've also worked with Oracle in the past. At this company, since it is an older server, it may have been in service longer. We were using the two databases for two different functions.

I wasn't a part of the installation process, however, it's my understanding that the company handled the installation themselves. 

The administration team has three or four team members. They can handle maintenance tasks and rotate tasks between themselves.

My understanding is that the company handled the installation internally. However, I was only recently hired. 

Any kind of information related to costs or licensing is beyond my scope. I don't deal with that aspect of the solution. I do not know if licensing is paid monthly or yearly.

We are customers and end-users.

Our architecture is divided. There are parts on-premise and parts on Azure cloud. I don't know exactly where the SQL Server sits. 

I'd rate the solution at a nine out of ten.

I might recommend it to other organizations. That said, it depends on the solution they need. I've worked on Oracle, I have worked on my Microsoft SQL servers. What would be best depends on the solution they need. However, Microsoft SQL servers are a very trusted product. I would recommend it if someone was asking about it.

We use the solution as a database for saving and managing data and applications.

Most valuable features include: high availability, clustering, save backup and recovery.

Although I am satisfied with the solution, some clients have asked us to resolve technical issues, such as those involving silver solution and replication.

I have been working with SQL Server for four or five years.

The solution is stable. 

The solution is scalable. 

I am satisfied with the solution's partner support. 

I am  satisfied with SQL Server.

Use of alternative solutions varies with the client involved. Some make use of all that SQL Server has to offer, while others employ everything in Oracle Database. We have managed to resolve any issues they have encountered in the two cases in which they have approached us. 

When examining Oracle or IBM db2, Oracle and SQL Server are generally the prefered products. 

While I find the setup and installation to be easy, others may find it difficult. 

I am only a technician and responsible for the installation, so I cannot comment on the licensing, although there are others in my company who are better qualified to do so. 

The solution is mostly deployed for our clients on-premises. 

We are satisfied with the documentation. 

My advice is that one adhere to the documentation before doing installation. 

I rate SQL Server as a nine out of ten. 

We are using SQL Server to build and store our whole company's data in our data warehouse.

SQL Server is very good, it can be used as a transactional database and used to support the data warehouse. Additionally, the ANSI-compliant satisfies our database properties.

I have been using SQL Server for approximately eight years.

I do not think SQL Server is suited for a typical database warehouse environment. However, people do use SQL Server for data warehouse environments but the best use case is for very small databases. If somebody wants to store more than 10 TB of data querying then the performance really degrades. The performance should be improved in the future to allow more scalability.

The scalability issue could be why many are moving to solutions, such as Teradata or other high-end on-premise solutions. Additionally, cloud solutions offer better scalability options.

The technical support from Microsoft is very good.

If you are looking for a small setup and do not want an open-source solution or invest too much money in your database then SQL Server is a very good choice.

I have evaluated other solutions, such as Teradata.

I rate SQL Server an eight out of ten.

We are using SQL Server for internal development projects.

SQL Server is easy to manage because all our DevOps team are familiar with it and simple to access because it is cloud-based.

The solution could improve by being more user-friendly.

I have been using SQL Server for approximately 10 years.

The solution is stable.

The solution is scalable, we have found it to be vertically scalable, but horizontal scaling, we have not used it for this purpose.

We are mostly using this solution for internal use, not for public services. We have approximately 10 developers using it.

My experience with technical support has been an average level of satisfaction.

The installation is easy.

We have one individual that is managing the solution at this time.

For our purpose, we are not required to have a license for what we are using it for.

I would recommend this solution to developers who are familiar with Microsoft's platform. However, for others who work with Linux-based solutions, I could recommend something else.

I rate SQL Server an eight out of ten.