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.

The SSIS, SSRS, and DB are the most valuable features because they help in everything.

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.

The Microsoft SQL Server is a great and powerful data storage capable to provide many functionalities starts on free version until the power with BI resource and mirroring.

MS SQL is a recognized data tool, it provides many ways to help us organize data and process information.

MS SQL need to improve the big data functions and also own market share.

since 1999

few problems

no

i didn't use it like admin, i don't know.

great product

Oracle, some times i used others solutions, but working by compatibility.

easy.

never calculate.

according you need

Apart from the standard SQL database-related features, the 2012 version enables the AlwaysOn functionality which enables two or more SQL Servers that can be clustered, with heartbeat across geographic locations along with high availability failover and 99.9999% uptime.

We have deployed three instances of the SQL Server, i.e., two at the primary datacenter and one at the disaster recovery facility. The AlwaysOn feature has ensured 100% database availability, even when one of the servers is down without any performance issues for the end user.

The Always ON (High Availability) functionality is support only with the MS SQL enterprise edition. It would be beneficial to many if this feature were also made available in the Standard Edition.

I am using the SQL Server for more than 10 years and the 2012 version, I have been using since the last five years.

There were no stability issues. If the initial configuration is done correctly, there are no issues. If the other servers are connected at remote locations, then the connectivity performance plays a vital role and it should be 10-15 ms for best results.

There were no scalability issues.

We have received excellent support from Microsoft and the local partners.

In the earlier versions, we used log shipping to the other servers for the failover and replication requirements. With this version, all the servers are Active/Active and there is no issue related to the availability or failover.

The basic installation is simple, whereas rest of the clustering requires an expert skill level for the configuration and deployment.

When comparing the Standard Edition to the Enterprise, it is expensive but the performance and features meet with the ROI and TCO. Thus, overall, it minimizes the redundant servers, multiple backup copies, the risk of non-availability of the latest copy at the disaster recovery.

The latest 2016 version has many more new features and functionalities, if you have the Enterprise Level Agreement and subscription model, you can upgrade to the latest version.

The Always ON (High Availability) functionality is support only with the MS SQL enterprise edition. It will be beneficial to many, if this feature is available in Standard Edition.

SQL Server integration services tools

Data quality services tools

Master data services tools

SQL Server reporting services tools

Data partitioning (horizontal partitioning) tools

ColumnStore indexes

In-memory OLTP tables

We design and implement data warehouse solutions with SQL Server 2016 Developer Edition tools. This solution has:

Given us high levels of productivity

Allowed us to use an agile approach to the design and implementation of data warehouse solutions for our customers

Given us a competitive advantage in our market

We do not have much to complain about SQL Server 2016 Developer Edition in itself.

We do have some complaints regarding licensing. In an emerging market like Argentina, it is very steep for our customers to pay USD 28,000 or more on licensing for an instance of SQL Server 2016 Enterprise Edition. This poses a limiting factor to our growth.

We have been using SQL Server 2016 Developer Edition for a few months so far. We have been using the previous version (SQL Server 2014 Developer Edition) for more than two years.

We did not encounter any deployment issues.

We did not encounter any stability issues.

We did not encounter any scalability issues. This is the case even though the Developers Edition does not offer the same level of performance and scalability that the equivalent Enterprise Edition offers.

As usual, Microsoft offers very good customer service. The amount of resources (self-study materials, online courses, and tutorials) is huge and most of it is free. Paid customer service is also very good.

Paid technical support is very good and efficient.

I have used data warehouse tools from Microsoft since SQL Server 2000.

If you do the proper training prior to the setup, there will be no issues. However, the learning curve is wide and tall.

You could get started fast and sure if you stick to the many wizards included with the tools. However, the scope of those said wizards is limited.

We implemented with an in-house team only, with proper, prior training that was also done in-house.

Since SQL Server 2014 Developer Edition, Microsoft has been offering these tools free of charge. The ROI is mainly focused around training investment. We do the training in-house, so the ROI is around one year.

We have no issues with pricing and licensing for SQL Server 2016 Developer Edition, as it is free of charge. The thorny issue is with pricing and licensing with customers.

We do our best to design data warehouse solutions that can cover requirements from our customers within the capabilities of SQL Server 2016 Standard Edition.

The cost-benefit ratio offered by Microsoft's data warehouse solutions is, by a long shot, much more convenient for our customers, small and medium sized companies, than solutions from other vendors.

My advice is focused on companies that develop and offer data warehouse solutions for customers that use SQL Server. Consider the ROI, which is mostly training investment (for the Developer Edition). If training is not done in-house, only hire training from an official Microsoft training center in your region. Look for the best training center. Once you are done with the training, you can start taking customers for data warehouse projects.

I would rate MS SQL Server 4/5 for its ease of administration,rich features, Nice GUI support for all its complex features.

Valuable features include:

1.Management Studio (Nice GUI support for all its complex features.)

2.Hot add CPU

3.Configure Dynamic memory also configure MIN and MAX memory.( Very flexible)

4.Replication ( Very Simple).

5.Clustering (The best high availability feature available among all
its compitators due to its robustness and scalability).

6.SSIS ( Very rich).

7.In memory OLTP in SQL Server 2012

8.Always On (High Availability) in SQL Server 2012

9.SQL Server Profiler

10.DMVs

The MSBI features SSAS, SSIS as well as SSRS together has enabled us to build a data warehouse for our Enterprise with Business Intelligence reports around the data. We have fully exploited its all complex features like Slowly Changing Dimensions in SSIS etc.

I am not sure if these areas have been taken care in SQL 2012 but areas for improvement include:

1.In SQL 2008 ,Data encryption is not a fully mature feature.Encryption works fine for individual rows.For handling a batch a for loop has to be written.This is not straight forward.
2.Horizontal partitioning is not a fully mature feature.In horizontal partitioning Partition key has to be part of primary key.This becomes difficult to implement in already existing database.

14 years.

No not at all.

No.

No.

Good.

Good. We have had only a few issues.

We were a Microsoft shop (.NET, Share point etc) primarily, hence using MS SQL Server 2008.

It was straightforward.

We implemented through in-house.

1. Find out the right licensing mode you require (Comes with different options CAL/Server and # of CPUs and Virtualisation).

2. Use the Enterprise lincencing or Standard edition or Web according to your need.

3.Make use of SQL Server Clustering or LOg Shipping high availability solution, the best you can find.

• Business intelligence platform
• Analysis services (multidimensional and tabular)
• Relational database features
• Data extraction and transformation (integration services)

It provides the ability to create an end-to-end automated BI platform through data management and provisioning, transformation and publication.

Data platform development process improvement: Integrating the features of Visual Studio Team Foundation Server data projects for SQL Server development. Allows for smooth operation between development environments in conjunction with an agile process to release database changes.

Hosting multidimensional OLAP instances in conjunction with Tabular, rather than the either/or installation.

OLAP multidimensional ongoing maintenance - automated partitioning or interface for streamlining the mechanism within the cube and data layers.

Integration Services: There is a great deal of room for improvement here in that thepackages are the least extensible part of the platform. Even with the feature ofplatform variables, since these are not easily managed and deployed. Our testers have had a great deal of difficulty swapping environments, particularly where the connection information changes (underlying database name, for example). Changing servers with identical database names is less problematic.

I've used it since its release in 2012 until now.

No issues encountered.

There were some avoidable issues, primarily due to a lack of scaling in our own design.

There were some avoidable issues, primarily due to a lack of scaling in our own design.

Online information for SQL Server is extensive.

I did not have the need to contact technical support for any reason.

Open Source database and OLAP solution was found to lack stability, and required the installation of many moving parts in order to have a complete stack. These services don't always work together well, and the various online communities would frequently blame the other for issues.

It's straightforward to install a new instance, but more complex if new features are added to an existing instance. Deployment of SQL code is efficient through Visual Studio database project development methodologies.

I have used both in-house, and vendor teams for implementation, both with very high levels of expertise into different aspects of database development.

It's very high as the data platform is business-critical.

I don’t concentrate on this issue, but rather the necessary features and the version required.

No other oprions were evaluated.

Make sure that you have an experienced database administrator to implement the infrastructure of the solution.