SQL Server Reviews

Typically, the SQL Server is used in many, many ways. We primarily use SQL Server when there is a data requirement for our projects.

Typically there are uses around where you are creating a database. I've yet to store the data in our RPA server. We need MS Excel through Microsoft.

Any sort of  RPA process where you require data through housing data or using a database, you need an SQL Server.

The solution is extremely stable. The performance is reliable.

The scalability of the solution is very good.

Technical support is pretty good. they are prompt in their responses.

You do need to have technical knowledge in order to install the solution. It's not something a layperson can do.

The scalability can always be improved.

I've been using this solution for a number of years now. It's been a while. I have some experience with it. 

The stability of the product is very good. It's reliable. There are no bugs or glitches. It does not crash or freeze. It doesn't give us any trouble.

The solution is very capable of scaling. A company should have no trouble expanding the solution as needed.

You can always add on to the server or make compartments into it.

We have a team of about 200 or more people using the solution.

We do plan to continue using the solution.

We've dealt with technical support in the past. We found that their responses have been prompt. Given their engagement to typical organizations, they do decent work. I would say that we are mostly satisfied with the level of support on offer.

We did not use any other databases prior to SQL. We only use SQL.

The initial setup does take some time. It depends upon how you are establishing the server in your environment and depends upon the firewall of your organization. It is a lengthy process, however, it is not that grueling. Depending upon the firewall of your organization, it does take time. That influences the time.

I can handle the installation myself. I did not need the help of a consultant or integrator. However, whoever installs it must be somebody who has the technical knowledge. Not everybody can do it.

We have an organizational license.

We are customers and end-users. We do not have a business relationship with SQL.

We are using the latest version of the solution. I cannot recall the exact version number.

I would recommend the solution to other users, companies, and organizations.

I'd rate the solution at an eight out of ten.

On-premises

The columnstore index feature is useful for us, and we also use the integration services. It is also very stable.

We would like to have a common storage option in the SQL Server. This option is available in Oracle Database. It would be great if Microsoft could create something like a columnstore that has not only indexing but also tables for common storage.

I have been using SQL Server for four years.

It is pretty stable.

If we talk about just standard RDBMS, it is very scalable because we don't have to scale platforms.

All communication with Microsoft technical support is done by our internal support group. I'm not communicating with them directly. I guess their technical support is okay and fast.

I would recommend SQL Server as a solution for a medium enterprise or a small business.

I would rate SQL Server an eight out of ten.

On-premises

This is a departmental database engine which supports primarily localized solutions, data capture, and retrieval. However, with the exception of our aviation group, it is used for localized data lake or reporting solutions support.

It is cost effective with easy integration into the core MS Office tools. Hence user adoption is easy. Also, being a commodity product there is an abundance of cheap resources having experience with the toolkit, but very few senior or truly expert support personnel are available. Again because it is viewed as a commodity product even by developers, no serious time is spent on skills development with this toolkit.

Traditional DB toolkit closely integrated into Microsoft Office. This makes it truly easy to deploy in a light non-business critical environment.

• It does not scale up to a truly global environment. We operate in 220+ countries and territories with data services centralized in three data centers. The ability for MS SQL to operate in this environment is a challenge for anything spanning regions or having a global footprint. 
• It is best suited to supporting a single functional instance by business domain or a single country. 
• MS needs to work better at the WAN implementations transoceanic. 
• It also needs to have a less closed or less MS centric tool dependency as integration with other databases and non-MS development environments is always problematic.

More than five years.

The ability to browse table structures and re-design it easily.

It improved the efficiency in giving service to clients, and allowed to me make all kinds of important reports easily.

The compiler should be much more precise and give you more information about the error.

I've used it for two and a half years.

No issues encountered.

Running long and complicated queries could make the software crash. You should run them part by part instead (i.e. with stored procedures).

No issues encountered.

Customer Service:

I haven't had to contact them.

Technical Support:

They give quick, and helpful, responses. About 9/10.

This was the solution I've used.

It's pretty straightforward, and usually everything goes smoothly. Everything was user-friendly and took me a minimum amount of time to understand how everything works.

We did it in-house.

The price is pretty high, buy it's worth getting the license.

No other options were evaluated.

Personally, I love Microsoft products and I’m pleased with this one as well. I would advise you to get it.

A great database management system for all size companies. SQL server is more user friendly than competitors. Provides easy installation. If you need support or research for the product, it is easy to find help online. There are 3 editions available which will meet any companies needs. Latest version is cloud ready. Offers power and flexibility.

For each additional core feature you want to add to your DBMS edition, it is more money. This is not a FREE program as most other DBMS are. So basically, the more you want, the more you pay.

A great DBMS for organizations of all sizes. Will be my first choice for a DBMS again in the future. The installation process was simple. You will pay for this SQL Server, but don't be afraid to try the free programs also.

We primarily use the solution to store databases. 

Since MongoDB, we have come up and there are lots of tools that do enhance the database management system or keep an eye on our data. People can easily access it. 

The solution is stable. It's reliable. 

The initial setup is simple. 

MongoDB is a bit better. A traditional database system, like the SQL Server, is failing to catch up.

You need an experienced person to use that piece of technology so that you can store everything in a logical manner. We'd like it to be easier to store in a logical manner.

The scalability could be better. 

We've been using this solution since 2012. It's been a while at this point. 

It's not scalable. It hinders your performance as it's slow in nature and you need experienced people to work on it. That is why it's not very scalable.

We currently have ten to 15 users on the solution. 

At this time, we have no plans to increase usage. We are focusing more on MongoDB.

We don't have any experience with Microsoft technical support. Therefore, I wouldn't be able to rate how responsive or helpful they are.

We did not previously use a different solution. We are currently moving towards MongoDB, however.

The installation is easy, especially since the new version has come up. Now, with the latest versions, installation is easy.

I cannot remember the time it took to complete the installation.

Earlier, we had to bring in a technical team, however, our own technical team is quite experienced now. They can now do it themselves.

We pay a yearly subscription fee. 

We use both cloud and on-premises deployment models. We're using the latest version of the solution. 

I'd recommend the solution to other users and organizations. If there are people who can't afford MongoDB or if an organization doesn't want to migrate to MongoDB, it's important to keep in mind the users would have to learn the fundamentals of the SQL server first. Knowledge of it is a necessity.

I'd rate the solution at a six out of ten.

On-premises