SQL Server Reviews

The database engine within SQL Server 2014 is one of the most valuable components of the platform to me.

The engine provides a solid and efficient database backend for any relational database requirement, performance is strong and there are options such as table, index partitioning and columnstore indexes that enhance the scalability of the platform.

In addition to the database engine, I would also highlight the built-in integration services platform (SSIS) for ETL purposes as well as the Reporting and Analysis Services functionality (SSRS and SSAS respectively).

One of the key features that I would use regularly to support the delivery of a Data Warehouse solution would be the Master Data Services (MDS). This is an extendable Master Data Management platform that works very well out-of-the- box.

As an IT Services organization, our companies have used this product in dozens of customer deliveries for solutions such as ERP applications, Data and Analytics solutions, and more. We also use the product internally as the backend for some of our most important operational systems.

The user interface to the web frontend of MDS could be more intuitive and the Analysis Services platform has not evolved much in recent times, these are the two things that come to mind.

This specific version (2014), I have used for approximately three years. However, I use other versions of the software on a regular basis, such as 2012 and 2016.

There were no issues with stability.

There were no issues with scalability.

Microsoft has a solid support structure for the SQL Server platform and I’ve always been provided with a good service.

We used a combination of RDBMS platforms and we still do in addition to this solution.

The installation and configuration was very straightforward. The full setup typically takes less than one day.

The Enterprise license includes features that enrich the product experience as well as performance and scalability options. Choose this over the standard license where possible.

We reviewed many RDBMS platforms for suitability depending on the requirements of the customers. We would also use the likes of Oracle 12c and Amazon RDS.

Install a trial version as soon as you can and give it a try.

It's a solution that's always on.

It has High Availability, therefore provides failover if a node becomes unavailable.

• Few in SSIS
• Realtime data refresh in SSRS
• More datasources in Power BI

• Reliability
• Ease of use
• Extensive Knowledge Base to improve and maintain the product

The majority of the software frameworks utilised by companies I have supported use SQL Server by Microsoft as the application's database management system. It always been reliable and consistent providing tremendous functionality for many years. 

The user interface can be improved through the adoption of the intuitive interaction design of the MS Office 2013 applications.

 5 years

I previously used MongoDB before the stability of innovative products still remains questionable in both theory and practice. 

100%.

We use SQL Server for database management.

The main feature of this solution is ease of use.

I have been using SQL Server within the past 12 months.

The solution is stable and reliable.

SQL Server has been very scalable.

We have approximately 200 users using the solution in my organization.

We are satisfied with the technical support.

I previously used a different solution in the other company I worked for.

We have a hardware support partner who does the implementation.

The price of the solution could be cheaper.

I rate SQL Server a nine out of ten.

We use SQL Server for collecting and storing our data.

I like that it's relatively stable.

It would be better if it had more integration with other systems.

I have been using SQL Server for over five years.

I think it's scalable.

It's relatively stable.

Technical support is good. When I have a problem, they're responsive.

I've tried to do the initial setup, and I don't think it's that easy. But I think the configuration is normal.

I set up and deployed this solution myself.

I would recommend this product to new users.

On a scale from one to ten, I would give SQL Server an eight.

We are using SQL Server for internal development projects.

SQL Server is easy to manage because all our DevOps team are familiar with it and simple to access because it is cloud-based.

The solution could improve by being more user-friendly.

I have been using SQL Server for approximately 10 years.

The solution is stable.

The solution is scalable, we have found it to be vertically scalable, but horizontal scaling, we have not used it for this purpose.

We are mostly using this solution for internal use, not for public services. We have approximately 10 developers using it.

My experience with technical support has been an average level of satisfaction.

The installation is easy.

We have one individual that is managing the solution at this time.

For our purpose, we are not required to have a license for what we are using it for.

I would recommend this solution to developers who are familiar with Microsoft's platform. However, for others who work with Linux-based solutions, I could recommend something else.

I rate SQL Server an eight out of ten.

We use the solution for managing our database functions.

The solution is easy to use.

The performance could improve.

I have been using the solution for approximately four years.

I have found SQL Server stable.

I have found it to be scalable.

The technical support is good from Microsoft. We have four people that do the maintenance of the solution.

The initial setup is straightforward, it took approximately one hour.

I did the implementation myself.

There is a license required for this solution.

I would recommend this solution to others.

I rate SQL Server an eight out of ten.

Right now, we are using DB2 and the SQL Server. It's really helpful for the replication of data. It's real-time and very easy to use.

The product is very stable. We find it to be reliable.

The scalability is okay. 

The installation is pretty straightforward.

For now, we've found the features to be sufficient. I cannot recall feeling anything is actually missing.

The pricing of the product could be better. They could make it more reasonable or more competitive.

Microsoft's technical support could be better.

We've been supporting these servers for a couple of years at this point. It's likely been about two or so years. We've worked with them for a while. 

The solution is very stable and reliable. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. We're happy with it.

The scalability potential depends on the resources. If the resources are enough, we can scale it. For us, it's already enough. However, if a company plans to expand, it should be prepared for that beforehand. 

We have more than ten users on the solution currently.

Microsoft technical support could be improved upon. They aren't the best. They could always be better.

We also use IBM DB2. We support it for our customers.

We have found the solution to be straightforward. It's not overly difficult or complex. A company shouldn't have any issue with implementation.

The product implementation process depends on the needs of the client. For us, deployment was around 30 minutes to one hour. It's pretty quick.

The solution could be priced more competitively. We'd, of course, like it to be lower. Microsoft can sometimes be expensive.

Each customer needs their own license.

We use the solution both on the cloud and on-premises. 

I'd rate the solution at a nine out of ten. We've been pleased with its capabilities overall.

I would recommend the solution to other users and companies. They should know that it is very easy to use. 

We had two people that handled the initial setup - an engineer and a manager. It's pretty easy to handle if an engineer is doing the setup.