I like that it's a cloud solution, is simple to set up, and is simple to use.
We are also totally satisfied with the stability and scalability of SQL Server.
I like that it's a cloud solution, is simple to set up, and is simple to use.
We are also totally satisfied with the stability and scalability of SQL Server.
It would definitely be better if SQL Server were free.
I've been using SQL Server for two years.
It's a cloud-based solution.
We have had no issues with stability.
It is scalable, and we have had no issues so far.
The initial setup is straightforward and is comparable to that of PostgreSQL.
We pay per second of usage, but there are different offerings of the license.
We evaluated Oracle and PostgreSQL.
For people who would like to use SQL Server for specific use-cases, I would definitely recommend it.
On a scale from one to ten, I would rate this solution at eight.
It is used for many things. We primarily use it for our two-tier and three-tier applications.
It is stable, and it works okay.
It would be nice if they can reduce its price.
I have been using this solution for ten years.
It is stable.
I didn't use their technical support.
I have used Microsoft Access.
Its installation is straightforward. It took half an hour to one hour.
I can install it myself.
We did a one-time payment. Its price, in general, can be reduced.
I would recommend this solution to others. I would rate SQL Server an eight out of ten.
Our primary use case is for data mart and data warehousing. My company is a service company and we provide the professional services for deployment of BI solutions. We are customers of SQL Server and I'm head of data analytics.
This solution is very easy to use, and it's very democratic in the enterprise. A lot of customers use this type of database, and that's why the deployments are very often in the medium enterprise.
I think the scalability of the database could be improved if it could handle increased volumes of data. I'd also like to see improvement in performance when you are loading big amounts of data. Integration with other solutions would be a nice additional feature.
I've been using this solution for 10 years.
The solution is very stable.
The solution is scalable to a point but not for very large enterprise.
I don't have too much contact with the support at Microsoft, but as far as I know, it's good.
This is a very affordable solution, which is why it's used so widely in the market. I think one of the strongest points of SQL Server is the reasonable cost.
The value of this solution depends on the business case that you're trying to accomplish and company size, and it depends on the volume of data you're looking for and the type of users that you're trying to serve. Basically, it depends on everything that goes with the functional requirements of the solution. If all that works then I would recommend this product.
I rate this solution a seven out of 10.
It is a typical database solution, and it is working well so far. It is easy to use, and it is also very common and popular, which makes it easy to find a support partner.
It will be very useful to have high-level database monitoring. It should also have built-in business intelligence reporting.
I have been using this solution for more than ten years.
We have around approximately 600 or 700 users of this solution. Currently, everybody is using this solution, and we don't have a plan to increase its usage.
We don't have a direct connection with Microsoft support. We have a support partner who is in contact with the official Microsoft support.
Its initial setup is easy.
I would recommend this solution. I would rate SQL Server an eight out of ten.
The most valuable feature is easy installation. It was very easy to install.
The interface is very user-friendly.
I would like to see more integration with other products and it needs to be more secure.
I have been using SQL Server for two months and I believe that we are using the latest version.
It's a stable solution. It's very stable.
It is a scalable solution.
My installation requires SQL Servers, so I have to continue using them.
I have not contacted technical support.
Previously, we did not use another product.
The initial setup was straightforward. The installation was easy.
It took two hours to deploy.
I completed the implementation myself.
I would recommend this solution to others who are interested in using it.
I would rate SQL Server an eight out of ten.
Our server projects are mostly related to SQL Server, and we're using it. All our healthcare projects are using the SQL Server, and we're able to load millions of data without any issues.
It's more user-friendly than most databases. If we don't have to use the command mode, it's very easy.
The performance could be better. When we pump in millions of records, we start struggling, and that's why we want improvement in those areas.
I have been using SQL Server for more than ten years.
In the past, it wasn't stable compared to other products like Oracle Db2, but it has improved, and now it's stable.
The installation is easy, and performance-wise it's okay now.
SQL Server installation is easy, and we did it by ourselves.
I would recommend this product to new users.
On a scale from one to ten, I would give Microsoft SQL Server an eight.
We primarily use the solution as a database for business operations.
I personally work with Microsoft products and therefore I like the continuity it provides. I like sticking with the brand.
The solution is very stable.
The product has very good online documentation that can be used for troubleshooting.
The solution can scale as necessary.
We've found the setup to be quick and relatively easy.
The licensing costs are very high.
I would like the scaling process to be more transparent and obvious.
There's a lot of documentation on the web, and it is quite extensive, and yet it isn't very well organized which makes it hard to find items often.
I've been using the solution for a very long time. It's been around ten years or more. I'd say it's been at least a decade at this point.
The stability of the solution is quite good. We don't have issues with it. It doesn't crash or freeze. We don't experience bugs or glitches. It's reliable.
While I personally haven't gone beyond 50 or so users, it's my understanding that as long as you pay for the licensing, you can grow as much as you need to. There would be costs involved, however, the solution can scale if a company needs it to.
I'd love to have Microsoft explain to me the scaling process so that I could better understand it. Right now, I'm in the dark.
In terms of technical support, I can say that sometimes I need them. However, it's very difficult to contact Microsoft support for anything.
In general, they have none. I wouldn't know how to reach them directly for help if I needed it.
Right now they have good support for their Azure product, in the cloud. However, this is not the case for on-premise products. That means, as an on-premise user, I have a problem. That said, since their product is well-known, there's a lot of documents on the web. If I try to search online I will typically find the answers I need.
The initial setup is not complex. It's pretty straightforward. It takes an hour or less to set everything up. Some people may need a few hours, however, for me, less than an hour was enough. That said, the Windows Server would also take an hour or two to set up as well.
The solution certainly comes at a cost, however, for me, it's an acceptable cost. I find it acceptable due to the fact that it would be free if I use MySQL on-premise, however, then it would be hard to hire people to maintain it. It's a give and take. That said, the license cost is very very high. I'm afraid if I use it on a larger scale it will cost a lot.
Currently, we're just Microsoft customers, although we would like to have a partnership with the company in the future.
I haven't done the HA for SQL server yet, therefore, I'm not sure how hard it is and how difficult it would be to implement, or how stable and how scalable it is.
There are two markets really. It's Microsoft and non-Microsoft. If anyone is familiar with Microsoft products, then they should go with this, however, they should bear in mind that it comes at a cost. The SQL cost is quite high if a company is using it at a large scale.
That said, if a company is looking at something small scale, there is a free edition. I use the standard edition, and it won't cost too much.
In any case, for those that aren't tied to Microsoft options, there are a lot of products out there that might be suitable with very little overhead.
In general, I would rate the solution at an eight out of ten.
We have a Windows Server environment.
This is a production system for secure document issuing in a government department.
It helped reduce licensing costs and also running costs, as well as the learning curve.
The most valuable feature is replication because we had several replicas of the SQL Server database in different geographical locations.
I would like to have more replication scenarios.