Microsoft Azure SQL Database Reviews

We primarily use SQL on Azure for reporting and incident situation awareness around our area. It's utilized for public information dissemination regarding different safety programs, ensuring nothing too complicated or in-depth.

Azure SQL is easy to integrate and simplifies things from a licensing perspective. We're comfortable with SQL versus other types of databases, so we feel better talking to Microsoft.

Reporting and incident situation awareness around our area and just reporting public information. The database seamlessly integrates with other Microsoft applications like SharePoint Online, PowerApps, and PowerFlow. We don't have to worry about maintenance, such as patching the servers. Leveraging other Microsoft technologies outside of our network is a lot easier.

It's a lot easier to create databases. There are some limitations in terms of permissions, but you can create databases by clicking a few buttons. You only need to provide the user authentication, and that's it.

Adding users to Azure SQL could be easier. You need to script it out, but it would be nice if it had a UI where you can click and add them. It's not a major thing because we script things all the time, but it would be a minor thing that helps us.

I have been using SQL on Azure for about ten years.

I haven't encountered any real latency issues. Our internal database is heavily utilized, but externally on the Azure SQL, we don’t push it to its limit.

Based on our limited use cases, Azure SQL appears highly scalable without any issues.

It's really a non-factor at this point, as we are comfortable with the system's ease of use.

Positive

I've used MySQL and other databases before, but our organization decided to go with Microsoft, and it felt natural due to my background as a .NET developer.

The initial setup was straightforward, and the integration process has become much easier over time.

I rate Microsoft Azure SQL Database nine out of 10. 

We primarily use Microsoft Azure SQL Database for application databases for web applications and sometimes native iOS and Android platforms. We also employ it for the backend and analytics, often migrating data over to Fabric and One Lake for Power BI analytics.

Microsoft Azure SQL Database is quite impactful as we use it for most projects. 

I like that Microsoft Azure SQL Database is almost identical to an on-premise SQL Server except for a few things, like how you edit rows and some jobs that you can't run. It has some useful features and integrations, like Microsoft Fabric.

They could improve Azure SQL by adding some of the features available on-prem, such as cross-database queries and the ability to run particular jobs. We need to migrate those to something else, like a function or logic app. 

Data transformation units are also confusing to sell to our clients because they're these weird, nebulous things. Do you need five or 50? 

I have been using Microsoft Azure SQL Database since it first started in 2009.

Microsoft Azure SQL Database does not seem to have any significant latency issues and handles millions of rows well.

Microsoft Azure SQL Database scales well, allowing us to increase our compute level or add more instances as required.

The learning resources and documentation provided by Microsoft are very helpful. There are many free learning segments and videos available to guide users through various aspects of Azure SQL Database.

Positive

I worked with SQL Server since version 6.5 in the late nineties and have continued to use it through various versions. I have also used other database platforms like ADB and MongoDB, but I prefer SQL Server due to its superior tools and features. I've used Cosmos DB for a few things, and we use Azure AI Search, a cognitive search pronounced by a different name. So use that, you know, Azure AI services. 

Azure SQL and Cosmos DB are our main solutions unless the client wants to use Oracle, Postgres, or MySQL. We will use whatever they want to use. On the analytics side, we use Fabric and One Lake, and we do the analytics of Power BI.

If we use a smaller or free-sized Microsoft Azure SQL Database, it is extremely cost-effective and much cheaper than on-premise enterprise licenses, which are expensive.

Other database solutions I have used include Cosmos DB for certain AI applications, as well as Oracle, Postgres, and MySQL when clients prefer those solutions.

I started working with SQL at SQL Server six point five in the late nineties. So, I mean, I went to SQL seven, two thousand, and then, you know, just been using it ever since. I've used other platforms, like I said, with ADB and, like, even with MongoDB and DevOps. It's just kinda my favorite one. I like the tools the best. Yeah. Seeking Server Management Studio is probably the best IDE out there for databases. All the other ones, are a little bit slow and clunky. Okay. So

I would rate Microsoft Azure SQL Database a nine out of 10.

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.

While we have a trader client or warehouse management, we use SQL Azure because the volume of trading activity keeps changing. Maintaining on-premises solutions or infrastructure for this is difficult, as the user demand can fluctuate significantly throughout the month. For example, at the end of the month, there is a high volume of orders and data as traders push their orders to their incoming entries. This can cause the user demand to spike and then drop off again. Hence, we need a flexible infrastructure that can scale up and down to meet the changing demand.

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. So, users cannot come and say that these are the problems we are facing.

Mostly, it is the cost. Microsoft services are costly, which is the only problem we face. So, pricing is an area of improvement.

Another downside is that it's very difficult to investigate if something wrong is going on behind the scenes. If we are facing a problem that our application is doing a CPU spike and when we look at the dump of the details, the processes that our application is generating are not consuming more than 40-50% of CPU. But we don’t know where it is going, who's generating it, and who's consuming the CPU. Even Microsoft says they don’t know. They simply said we cannot give you the details. So, a bit of control over such processes or maybe analytics for it is something that needs improvement as well.

In the last four or five years, a couple of clients have been more into Azure databases. So, depending on the client, we use this solution. 

Installation is easy. It has been changed the way it is being done. Once you do that, it's okay.

It is difficult to maintain it on-premises. If you are maintaining everything on your own, you need somebody who knows security. Everything comes into your bucket. So, you need to focus more on the infrastructure side and the maintenance of the application.

I've worked with clients who have multiple multifunction solutions, where some solutions use some technologies, and some use some.

SQL Azure is very well maintained. Most of the services are good. If not the best, but they're good—no such complaints.

Overall, I would rate SQL Azure a nine out of ten.

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.

Our primary use case for Microsoft Azure SQL Database is to bring up our products and run them on Azure as we have our own TCX products. We have been using AWS in the back end, but we are now expanding to Microsoft Azure.

The native SQL runs great on Microsoft, and the integration with Microsoft applications like Office makes it seamless.

Microsoft Azure SQL Database significantly reduces our operational overhead, freeing us from backup worries and allowing us to focus on other priorities. Additionally, SQL Managed Instance provides clear usage visibility and enables on-demand scaling to meet our evolving needs.

Microsoft Azure SQL Database is our go-to database for our products, such as SQL or Oracle. The usability, ease of use, and fine-tuning are beneficial, especially for our IO-intensive application. It empowers us by running our availability through the product side.

Provisioning the instance, connecting to it, and deploying full-stack applications end-to-end on Azure is much easier than AWS. 

Azure SQL provides built-in security and useful troubleshooting tools for identifying and taking action whenever issues arise.

We need improvement in the latency between availability zones. The managed SQL MI does not allow us to control the zone it runs in, which affects latency. It's crucial for us that customers should not be concerned about which availability zone it's running as long as the response time and latency are consistent.

I've been using Microsoft Azure SQL Database for approximately three months.

We experience some latency issues.

We are working on a scalability performance test for SQL MI and comparing it with AWS.

We are expanding our cloud infrastructure from AWS to include Microsoft Azure. Azure's managed database services eliminate the operational overhead of running our own database, allowing us to quickly deploy and connect to pre-configured instances without manual tuning or backups.

The setup is straightforward, being a managed service, so operational overhead is minimized.

We anticipate seeing savings as we start using Microsoft Azure SQL more extensively.

I would rate Microsoft Azure SQL Database eight out of ten. Our experience has been good overall, except for the latency issue. If latency issues are resolved in future releases, I would rate it higher.

Microsoft's expertise in SQL Server is a significant advantage. Their resources are beneficial, and a primary reason for choosing SQL MI is the reduced operational overhead. By eliminating the need for a dedicated database administration team, we can avoid the costs and complexities associated with managing and distributing the database. This is a crucial factor in our decision-making process.

We use nearly all of Azure's services, including virtual machines, application gateways, firewalls, load balancers, and SQL Managed Instances. Our projects involve a comprehensive engagement with the Azure platform.

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.

We use SQL Azure to store our relational data. Whenever I have complex relational data with consistency requirements, I use SQL Azure Database.

I'm currently working in a small startup. There are just two people using this solution now: a developer and myself. I'm working as a technical consultant and an architect.

Microsoft recently added a JSON feature. I use all the features in a normal relational database, and they're very helpful. I prefer using Microsoft SQL Server because I like the experience and the way Microsoft handles the query tuning and security. These are really good features for database experts.

One of the nice features in Microsoft SQL Server is the SQL Server CLR, which we sometimes need to protect our procedures using C# or CLR. This feature isn't available in the SQL Azure database. It's available in the Managed Instance in the Azure Database.

You can create SOAR procedures using C# and can get user-defined functions using C#. You can extend the database and the data files using CLR files. This feature isn't available on the Microsoft Azure SQL Database. I understand they can't add it because it's a managed service, and having CLR probably doesn't work for them, but it would be nice if they could add this feature.

I have used this solution for almost six years.

I would rate the stability as eight out of ten.

It is very scalable, depending on how much you're willing to pay. We can have up to 4,000 DTUs, but we haven't needed that much scalability.

We had an instance where we weren't able to deploy Cosmos DB on a UAE data center, and Microsoft helped us. We haven't had any issues so far with technical support.

Setup is straightforward. You just create an SQL Server instance account on Azure, and then you can create SQL databases. It's very easy to create tables and procedures. I mainly use the SQL data buckets inside Visual Studio. From there, I deploy databases to Azure from Visual Studio.

It's easy to do the deployment in-house. Visual Studio provides a lot of functionality to make deploying solutions to Azure simple and easy.

Using SQL Server database with all the features will provide a good return on investment. Once you move to Azure, you remove all the capital expenses by having to acquire the license and deploy it on-premises.

When you go with SQL Azure Database, you can create a small database, which is around $4 to $5 per month for development purposes. It's very cheap in that respect. I think it's a little bit expensive compared to other services that Microsoft offers on Azure. PostgreSQL, MySQL, and MariaDB are a bit cheaper than SQL Server.

If the price were lower, I think it would become more attractive for developers to use.

I would rate this solution as eight out of ten. 

It's a very easy solution. Microsoft also has Data Explore. The entire Microsoft environment makes things easy for developers. It's very easy to set up SQL on Azure. I highly recommend it. I really like it, and I've been working with SQL Server since 2000.