Microsoft Azure SQL Database Reviews

We use this solution to store data MODS that are going to be consumed by Power BI.

The solution is quire more stable than other tools.

I would like to the solutions scalability to be improved.

I have used this solution for the past three years.

This is a stable solution in general.

It is moderately scalable in my opinion. On-premise, you can definitely scale it up better, but it is a bit restricted on the cloud.

We used Oracle Databases and SQL Server databases on-premise.

The initial setup was easy for about five hundred users and it required just a couple of managers.

Our consultants helped with the implementation and the process took maybe ten minutes.

I would recommend this solution for those who are looking to integrate it. I would rate this an eight out of ten.

We are using this solution for analytics and business intelligence.

The solution is deployed on-prem and on cloud. The cloud provider is Microsoft.

There are tens of thousands of users. In my market in Poland, there are maybe 1,000 using the application based on the solution.

It's user-friendly. Compared to other solutions, it's based more on clicks, not on scripts. It's easy to manage.

There could be more collaboration with other tools like Data Factory and Databricks.

I have been using this solution for 20 years.

It's stable.

It's scalable, but it could be better.

I don't use support because the documentation is very good, and the solution is easy to manage.

In Azure, deployment takes minutes. It's easy.

The cost is around $2,000 per month.

I would rate this solution 8 out of 10.

My advice is to read the documentation and blogs.

We are deploying a few server-based applications, and we are using the Azure SQL database.

It provides good analytics. We can see which database is getting more requests, etc. We are able to see everything in Azure SQL. Its analytics are in a readable format, so a layman can understand them.

Its performance is good. It has a lot of features. It has the backup feature, which is not there in Amazon RDS. In Azure SQL, there is an option to replicate and restore a database point to point, whereas we can't do that with Amazon RDS.

It is also simpler and more powerful than Amazon RDS. It also has analytics, and it automatically suggests a few things. It has an in-built indexing function.

In terms of support, they don't give much support.

I have been using this solution for four to five years.

There are more than 12,000 people using this service. Its usage is going to increase day by day.

They don't give much support, but their tech support subscription cost is much lesser than AWS.

Its installation is very easy. We can easily move from one pool to another pool in Azure. It takes just one to two minutes.

We take care of it ourselves.

It only has a subscription-based license.

I would recommend this solution to others. I would rate it a ten out of ten.

Our primary use case of this solution is to host our databases and it is fulfilling our requirements.

The most valuable feature from the infra point of view is you don't have to keep any on-prem infrastructure, it is available all the time whenever you want to access it.

The solution can be improved by reducing the cost so more users can be added.

I have been using the solution for 15 months.

Our customers work in the space of small and medium businesses area segment. For them, the way the solution is being offered and used is working and is considered to be stable.

Not much is required in terms of scalability. So the foreign enterprises which are spanning the globe that requires scalability could be different. Small and medium businesses have a presence only in one location or maybe a couple of cities within a country. this is a reasonably scalable solution for them.

The license is based on the number of users.

I give the solution nine out of ten.

Currently, we have 25 to 30 developers using the solution.

There are alternative solutions available like Oracle or MySQL but I have not used any of them.

I recommend the solution.

Our primary use case is for content management and publishing offsite for external users. We also use it as the intranet to get the largest professional view of the SharePoint version.

In SQL we tend to do normal queries. The features we use quite a bit are the backup and monitoring and also the export and import tools for data. We use all of these on a daily basis.

We're still discovering aspects of the solution. We haven't yet deployed all of the components, so I'm not sure of what additional features we'd like to see.

The stability is good and the performance is fantastic. Even when we try to do an inquiry into issues we can do it easily. The administration of the tool itself is perfect and the performance is good. On the safety level, we have layers of a firewall. I think this makes it more secure, to help secure the level of encryption and the encryption of the data itself. 

We deploy the solution on four machines and are using VMware. We can continue to add on top of this as much as we like. Scalability isn't a problem at all.

We have many layers of technical support, starting with us and our own team. The vendor of our region also provides support if we need it.

The initial setup is complex.

We had to do some data collecting and we had issues with having redundant databases, meaning we had to do some synchronization between the databases. We did the integration of the networks and handled the clustering on top of the components of SQL. At the beginning we faced some issues, especially getting the servers to talk to each other. We needed to do some workarounds, but ultimately we were successful.

We did the implementation ourselves. 

We have a three-year contract. The cost was somewhere around $70-80,000 for the original deployment, which was about two years ago. In the future, we may need to expand our license to include more company employees.

We did a survey for seeing what technologies were in the market. We ended up with Microsoft because of the general business requirements. Also, we could add the components to the solution for product management. We could add document management, for example, and many other alternatives that covered various business requirements. We ended up with this solution because of the ability to utilize the components. We also had the flexibility of using other plug-ins that helped with the commercial aspects of the business.

We use the private cloud version of the solution.

I would rate the solution nine out of ten. I would recommend it.

 We use it for supporting an application from another platform to Azure.

Operational cost needs improvement. 

I have been using SQL Azure for 6-8 months. 

It is a stable solution.  

It is a scalable solution. 

The initial setup is straightforward. The designing process is involved in the deployment. 

Overall, I would rate the solution an eight out of ten. 

We usually work on a valuation basis. When a customer wants to get on to our cloud, we suggest SQL Azure to them.

The preset configuration switches we can select on SQL Azure should be made more liberal to work on. The licensing cost for the solution is very expensive and should be improved.

I have been using SQL Azure for eight years.

SQL Azure is a stable solution.

SQL Azure is a scalable solution. Around 30 to 40 customers are using the solution.

Their customer support is not ok at all because sometimes the tickets we raise don't get authorized.

The initial setup for the solution is easy. It takes around 10 to 15 minutes to set up the solution. The deployment of the solution is straightforward.

The ROI depends on the customer and the scenario.

SQL Azure's licensing cost is expensive.

SQL Azure is a cloud-based solution. We usually require one or two people to deploy and maintain the solution. I would recommend SQL Azure for other people who don’t want to manage their environment. The worst thing about Microsoft is that it has a very bad license agreement that nobody understands.

Overall, I rate SQL Azure an eight out of ten.

This is one of the applications where we are supporting in production.

If we are using SQL STL, it is a manual process. If we use STL Azure, we will import all the templates from the Azure cloud or Microsoft cloud. There are already pre-defined templates and pre-defined procedures in Azure. We will be using those instead of manual processes. Azure is helping us to be more flexible and handle time scaling.

I have limited experience with the tool. It's hard to describe its best feature. 

It's pretty helpful from a technical standpoint.  It's also dominating other clouds, including AWS and Google. It's better at improving itself. 

The product is easy to set up.

It's stable and reliable. 

I find the product to be scalable. 

The solution is pretty affordable. 

Microsoft has a lot of useful security privileges. 

I haven't really come across any shortcomings. I also have limited experience. We need to do more training and research.

It does take some time to learn about the environment. 

I've been using the solution for six months. 

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

The solution is easy to scale. 

We have more than 1,000 people using the solution. I'm not sure of the exact number of users. We have multiple accounts and end customers. 

In terms of technical support, we do have a lot of subscription privileges. We do have seniors, and tech leads to assist. They can discuss issues with the vendor and technical support.

We have used different solutions in the past. We found that if we worked manually, we would need more resources. With this solution, we have more time flexibility and stability. More complex things can be worked around.

The initial setup is straightforward. 

It is easy. We only use one account, a Microsoft Azure account, and we can pull all templates from there. It's got an easy user interface and admin interface which makes implementation straightforward. All you have to do is deploy all the scenarios. After that, it will take some time and flexibility to understand the environment.

It takes six hours to finish all the setup, including completing the installation of SQL and integrating with Genesis.

We find the solution to be less expensive than other options. 

We're customers and end-users.

I would recommend this solution. Microsoft is very efficient and forward-looking - making it less expensive to build the setup for Azure SQL. Even though we do have one Microsoft account, we can directly integrate it with everything at one time. We do have limited licenses which makes it less expensive compared to the Google cloud or AWS or whatever else is in the other market. 

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.