Our use case is creating data warehouses using the SQL Server database.
The solution is deployed on-premises and on public and private clouds.
Our use case is creating data warehouses using the SQL Server database.
The solution is deployed on-premises and on public and private clouds.
The solution has a user-friendly environment and supporting functionalities. It also has great memory and processing databases.
Other than Synapse and the other version of SQL Server, they face some problems while processing the data. For example, the one issue we face is that when we need to process the queue, it's costly with Azure and SQL Servers. We also face some memory issues with that.
I have been using this solution for more than eight years.
The solution is very stable.
The solution is scalable.
We have a different technical team that deals with issues. So we only communicate the issue to them, and they communicate with the team.
Setup is very easy, especially compared to Oracle.
Synapse is a bit costly. If I compare it with different databases, I think it's a reasonable price. If I'm talking about licensing of the Oracle, it seems that normal organizations have it and some smaller organizations can also afford it, which is a good thing.
I have also evaluated Oracle.
I would rate this solution 8 out of 10.
I always recommend SQL Server. To whoever asks me, I will say, "Just go for it." The databases are good. In terms of pricing, SQL Server is good. In terms of functionality, it gives you all the basic requirements. You can also integrate it with different applications, which is an advantage.
I use the solution for analytics and reporting.
I have found the most valuable features to be the flexibility and the vast amount of features available.
I have been using the solution for approximately three years.
The solution is stable.
The scalability is adequate but could improve. We have approximately 100 people using the solution in our company.
The installation is not difficult, it is quick. It took approximately 15 minutes to complete.
We have four technicians that do the deployment and maintenance of the solution.
I recommend this solution to others.
I rate SQL Server a seven out of ten.
My primary use case is for data mining and processing data from plants. It's normally just for databases for the systems.
The availability is the most valuable feature. It has high availability. It also has good performance.
In terms of improvement, it could use more integration with other products.
I have been using this solution for around ten years.
The stability is good. We don't have any issues with stability or scalability.
We have contacted support when we had Windows issues. They are okay, not the best but not the worst. They know what they're doing but they take a little too long. The response time isn't so good.
The initial setup is mostly straightforward. The time it takes to deploy depends on the circumstances. It takes around three or four hours.
I would recommend this solution. It's a good product. I am satisfied with it. It's familiar, we've been using SQL for a while.
I would rate it a nine out of ten. There's always room for improvement.
Performance improvements, optimizer enhancements. Most of our clients have high demands for performance, and this version of SQL Server delivers what we need.
We are a professional services company, so we use SQL Server to help our clients achieve their goals. Our clients use SQL Server 2016 for their most demanding mission critical systems, for data warehouses, and big data solutions.
The Query Store is a good start, but I expect the query processor to be a lot smarter and to use machine learning in order to improve and adjust execution plans automatically.
One year.
Since we are working with a lot of clients on many edge cases, we encounter bugs and stability issues once in a while, but these are rare.
If you know how to work with the product and leverage its various features and possibilities, then you can achieve great scalability.
Microsoft offers several levels of technical support, which is OK, but not too good. But there is a wonderful community with lots of resources on the internet, so most issues can be solved without contacting Microsoft support.
No, I have been using SQL Server for the past 20 years.
The initial setup is very clear and friendly. It has improved from the previous version.
Unfortunately, SQL Server licensing is a very complex topic. I advise people to consult with a licensing expert.
No.
Download the Developer Edition for free, install it on your personal computer (it’s very easy), and start exploring. If you need help with something, just search for it on the internet, and you’ll find a wealth of resources about everything you need.
There is improvement in the performances and stability.
SSIS needs improvement.
I think that it should be easier in managing SQL packages, especially when we have multiple environments. With Kerberos Authentication, we had different issues on this and sometimes, we needed Microsoft Support too. Thus, a better and an organized SQL package review is needed.
When using HA (high availability), we experienced some stability issues.
There were no scalability issues.
Technical support is the best, I would give them a 10/10 rating.
We were using a few other solutions such as MySQL, Oracle and Pervasive PSQL.
It’s okay as compared to the features that it has.
We evaluated the Oracle solution.
If you want stability, then choose the best.
We use SQL Server for developing systems.
The most valuable feature of SQL Server is the performance.
I have been using SQL Server for years.
We have approximately three people who are using this solution.
The technical support from Microsoft has been good.
The initial setup of SQL Server is straightforward.
We have two administrators that did the implementation of the solution.
The price of SQL Server could be reduced, the license is expensive. We have an annual subscription.
I would recommend SQL Server to others.
I rate SQL Server a seven out of ten.
It is for supporting our custom applications. We have a number of custom applications that we use that have SQL embedded.
I am using the version before the latest one.
Its usability is very good. Its performance is satisfactory.
Their support could be better. There should be more visibility on the progress of the ticket, and their last line of support should be more knowledgeable. Other than that, we have nothing to complain about.
I have been using this solution for seven to eight years.
Their support could be better. Sometimes, you don't have much visibility of how your service request is progressing. There should be more visibility, and the last line of support should be more knowledgeable.
It was straightforward. It took two to three hours.
We have internal staff for its implementation. We have a team of about three or four people who are well-versed with SQL Server, and we have 30 to 40 users who use this solution.
You need to pay for the license. It most probably has per-core licensing.
I would recommend this solution to others. We are satisfied with the product in general. Overall, I'd rate it an eight out of ten.
We're using SQL Server for database work.
What I find most valuable in SQL Server is that it's user-friendly.
The product needs improvement in its UX design. A newer interface is what I'd like to see in the next release of SQL Server.
I've been working with SQL Server for two years.
SQL Server is a stable system.
SQL Server is a scalable system.
I'm satisfied with the technical support provided by Microsoft for this product.
SQL Server is easy to implement, especially because it's a very common system that we use in the workplace.
Pricing for this product is very reasonable.
I evaluated Oracle Database.
SQL Server is a common product that I use on a daily basis, and I'm using its latest version. Most of my colleagues use it for database work.
200 people use this system in the company.
My advice for people looking into using SQL Server is that it's the best choice, especially for those who are beginners with databases.
My rating for SQL Server is nine out of ten.