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.

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 in nature, 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 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.

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.

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.

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.

I use Azure SQL for data storage and querying for applications.

Azure SQL works well. Our applications are hosted in AKS, and we can easily do the security and authentication. It's easer to set up than an on-premise SQL database, so that has had a positive effect on our productivity. 

We've saved time setting up the databases. While I'm not involved in the maintenance, I'm sure that's also a big factor. It's hosted in the cloud, so we don't have to maintain the servers. 

Azure SQL is really straightforward to use. It's nice that it's just SQL but in the cloud. We've switched from the on-premise SQL databases we use and have Azure SQL for some of our more recent stuff. It's seamless.

The AI applications sound neat. We haven't really gotten to do that yet, but we like that it works so well with Fabric. It seems like something we could easily connect.

One thing we struggled with was the network stuff. We had to figure out how to ensure we were secure. That part took a bit, but we're in a great spot now. We had to work with security to figure out our network policies. We're in a private instance, so you can only connect to it from our VPN. We've made some progress, and it's much easier to use now. Some more documentation and suggestions for network policies could be helpful.

We have used Azure SQL for a couple of years at this point.

The stability is great. I haven't noticed any problems with it so far.

The scalability is useful. Unlike our on-premise SQL Database, which is not easily scalable, Azure SQL allows us to increase the tier and get more performance as needed.

We switched from on-premise SQL databases to Azure SQL for more recent projects because it's easier to set up in the cloud without dealing with complex network rules.

We have a lot of people who are experts in Microsoft SQL stuff, so switching to Azure SQL was just a piece of cake for them because it's basically the same thing. 

We used our internal team, who are experts in Microsoft SQL, to switch to Azure SQL, finding it to be a seamless transition.

I rate Microsoft Azure SQL Database 10 out of 10.

We use it primarily as a data warehouse. We receive a lot of data from external vendors, and our goal is to consolidate all the information. Using data from various sources, we generate reports to support internal teams in the organization, mainly for operational tasks.

Microsoft Azure SQL Database has greatly improved maintainability by eliminating the need to manage on-premises SQL servers. The ease of scaling the server up and down by simply pressing a few buttons in a dropdown menu has made our lives significantly more comfortable, especially as we aim to process more data this year by utilizing the cloud.

It has helped to reduce our organization's total cost of ownership when it comes to our IT team who don't spend as much money on hardware, cooling, monitoring temperatures, and tasks like that. I know that IT people don't have to come into the office on weekends to make upgrades, do maintenance, or if there are alerts, and tasks like that.

It is easy to use. We interface with it using SQL Server Management Studio, which only requires a change in connection, so the interface remains consistent. This simplicity in usability, along with improved organizational productivity where we no longer need to maintain on-premises SQL servers, is invaluable. Scaling up and down the server with ease is a significant benefit, particularly as we aim to handle an increased data workload this year. Additionally, the integration of multiple services within Azure simplifies our operations. 

My company is in the early stages of exploring its ability to power next-generation AI applications. We've tried AI Studio. It's a little too data science-y for what our team does. Trying to connect our data with AI has a high learning curve.

It's been really easy to integrate with other Microsoft applications. We're currently in the middle of migrating a bunch of ETL packages and processes to Azure Data Factory. Everything living in Azure makes it really easy. 

Maintainability has increased a lot. We don't have to maintain the on-prem SQL Server because we don't have to maintain anything anymore. Maintainability has increased a lot in terms of the amount of time needed to do that. It's been really nice being able to scale the server up and down. It's made our lives a lot easier, especially since we're trying to ingest much more data this year.

We're trying to manage our costs better. We've noticed an unexpected increase in the cost of running the server over the past few months. Addressing pricing clarity and alignment would help us. Also, incorporating AI functionalities like Copilot into SQL Server Management Studio could enhance productivity by assisting with query writing and troubleshooting.

Professionally, I have been using SQL for about five years. At my company, we used on-premises databases for a long time, and in January of this year, we migrated to Microsoft Azure SQL Database. We have been running it for eleven months now.

So far, there have been no issues reported with latency and availability.

The experience has been positive. It is easy to scale up when needed and scale back down if required.

We used on-premises SQL servers. The switch to Microsoft Azure SQL Database was influenced by the elimination of maintenance required for on-premises systems and the desire to manage all technologies under one umbrella within Azure, considering our existing cloud footprint.

The initial setup was straightforward. It involved changing the connection string within SQL Server Management Studio, maintaining consistency in interfacing.

The team that migrated struggled with replication in the very beginning where replicating our database for redundancy seemed like it was over replicating. The amount of storage that it was taking up was four to five x our actual database size. We had to increase the capacity of it and that increased cost for a little bit until we shut down the replication. 

The price for running the server increased more than expected in recent months, and better alignment of pricing expectations is needed. Notably, costs related to IT staff coming into the office on weekends or monitoring hardware have presumably decreased.

During our evaluation, pricing was a key consideration, and Microsoft Azure's pricing model was more appealing compared to other competitors. The extensive cloud footprint we already had in Azure contributed to our choice.

On a scale from one to ten, I rate the overall product an eight.