We compared SQL Azure and Google Cloud SQL based on our user's reviews in several parameters.
User feedback on SQL Azure highlights its fair pricing structure, seamless integration with Microsoft products, and satisfactory customer service. On the other hand, Google Cloud SQL users appreciate its scalability, ease of use, and efficient customer support. Areas for improvement in SQL Azure include enhancing query performance and reducing costs, while Google Cloud SQL users seek better performance optimization and transparent pricing models. Overall, both products offer reliable database management solutions with their unique strengths and weaknesses.
Features: SQL Azure stands out for its seamless integration with other Microsoft products, scalability, and flexibility in deployment options. On the other hand, Google Cloud SQL is praised for its ease of use, high performance, excellent backup and restoration capabilities, and automated maintenance tools.
Pricing and ROI: The setup cost for SQL Azure is deemed reasonable by users, ensuring a smooth and hassle-free experience. On the other hand, Google Cloud SQL's setup cost is well-managed, ensuring a smooth and hassle-free process. There is no mention of specific differences in the setup cost between the two products., In terms of ROI, SQL Azure received positive and satisfactory feedback from users, while Google Cloud SQL users shared their experiences and outcomes.
Room for Improvement: SQL Azure has room for improvement in the areas of query performance, storage capacity, availability, customization options, and cost reduction. Users also want improved security features and integration with other Azure services. Google Cloud SQL users have suggested enhancements in performance optimization, scalability, availability, monitoring, and management tools. They also recommended more transparent pricing models and improved documentation and support resources.
Deployment and customer support: Based on user feedback, the duration required for deployment, setup, and implementation for SQL Azure is inconsistent. Some users report separate timeframes for deployment and setup, while others view them as the same period. On the other hand, Google Cloud SQL users have varying experiences, with some separating deployment and setup durations, and others considering them as one., SQL Azure has been praised for its highly satisfactory customer service, with users commending the responsiveness, efficiency, and knowledge of the support team. Google Cloud SQL also receives positive feedback for its prompt assistance and efficient issue resolution, with users appreciating the friendly nature of the customer service representatives.
The summary above is based on 45 interviews we conducted recently with SQL Azure and Google Cloud SQL users. To access the review's full transcripts, download our report.
"My suggestion to anyone thinking about this solution is to jump into it head-first!"
"This is a stable solution and offers good performance."
"The implementation part of the product was easy."
"I found its storage and security to be the most valuable. It was a good experience. It is also very stable and scalable, and its support is perfect."
"It's SQL. SQL is so easy if you know something about databases. It's easy to learn."
"It is not the cool features that I find valuable, it is the stability of Google Cloud Platform."
"The most valuable features are that it's easy to use, simple, and user-friendly."
"The solution is easy to use. I am impressed with the tool's features and functionality."
"The scalability and simple management of the infrastructure are the most valuable features."
"It is easily scalable, and it is faster than SQL Server. It is also less expensive than using SQL Server. It has the pay-as-you-go model, and the charges are based on the usage."
"It's easy to use and maintain. If we look at the development of the maintenance team, we are not directly responsible for any infrastructure issues. We have too many positive sides to that. No maintenance, easy to use, and we'll know the limits very well."
"Its easy usage is the most valuable."
"Its technical support team is good."
"The solution effectively handles storing and maintaining information in databases."
"Azure Portal is most valuable."
"The on-premise SQL Server licenses can be used since it is on Azure, so it's a significant savings for the customers."
"I am yet to explore a lot of features that are present in this solution. However, it would be good if more documentation is available for this solution. This would help us in preparing for the certification exam and understand it better. Currently, we don't have much documentation. We do the labs for 20 or 25 minutes, but we can't capture and download anything."
"The monitoring part could be better."
"The most vulnerable problem with Google SQL is that while you can customize your access control list, it provides you with a public IP address."
"Google Cloud SQL still needs better connectivity to outside, existing data sources."
"The purging of the data could be better."
"To create a seamless data integration, the title integration of these databases with the data integration platforms is essential. This is what we would like to have in a future release."
"Google's technical support is good, but they tend to never reopen a case and to send us snippets from the publicly available documentation. It's not as helpful as you would expect, not just for Google Cloud SQL but for all of Google Cloud products."
"The only thing that could be better is the pricing."
"I want the pricing to be improved."
"If it's a transitional system, there is a lot of reporting, so the solution becomes a bit slow when it's churning out tons of data, but it's good for a mid-sized application"
"I was using a user list for connecting a program in OTF for getting information. The connection in SQL Azure can improve by being easier because at the moment I have to use private certificates for user authentication. I had to do additional configuration to have the connections."
"Lacks some tools on the SQL Server for data virtualization."
"The management is entirely controlled by Microsoft, so there are some restrictions."
"Their support is nice but their responses aren't effective."
"I feel that the price is high and it could be reduced."
"Service Broker should be added in Azure Cloud. Service Broker is currently available only in the on-premises version."
Google Cloud SQL is ranked 5th in Database as a Service with 16 reviews while SQL Azure is ranked 2nd in Database as a Service with 90 reviews. Google Cloud SQL is rated 8.4, while SQL Azure is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Google Cloud SQL writes "An easy-to-use solution with good features and functionality ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SQL Azure writes "The SQL connector effectively syncs data to databases". Google Cloud SQL is most compared with Amazon RDS, MongoDB Atlas, Oracle Database as a Service, Google Cloud Spanner and Oracle Exadata Cloud at Customer, whereas SQL Azure is most compared with Amazon RDS, MongoDB Atlas, Oracle Database as a Service, Google Cloud Spanner and IBM Db2 on Cloud. See our Google Cloud SQL vs. SQL Azure report.
See our list of best Database as a Service vendors.
We monitor all Database as a Service reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.