SQL Server Reviews

Indexes, CTE, aggregate functions, partitions, memory optimized tables, service broker, CLR (C# assemblies),...

Can't imagine work without sql database. I have complete warehouse logic inside stored procedure and it works like a charm. It is installed in 20 companies with different warehouse types.

There is always some place for improvements. Statistics could be better (2 table statistic), or dynamic partition function, but that is probably true with every other product.

I'm using this solution for 14 years.

Deployment is pretty fluent.

No.

Yes, mostly connected to bad code.

Customer Service: Very good.Technical Support: Very good.

Better user experience, very rich functionality and good reliability.

Pretty straightforward.

In house.

Impossible to say. We have about hundred SQL servers.

mySql, firebird, access, and probably some more.

With right use it could be part of almost any size and type of company.

We used SQL Server to store all of our lab data on the database. We had a front-end application that needed SQL in the background for archiving all the laboratory data.

The solution could improve by having better integration.

I have been using SQL Server for approximately three years.

The solution could be more stable.

We have approximately 200 users that use an application that uses the SQL Servers database.

The installation was straightforward. We did not have a large installation and it took a couple of weeks to complete.

Our IT department does the implementation and maintenance of the solution.

There is an annual license and it is priced reasonably.

I would recommend this solution.

I rate SQL Server a nine out of ten.

On-premises

• Reliability
• Transaction management
• Its higher limits for storage and table management

Improvement to synchronous replication. Currently Microsoft's Always-On implementation of synchronous replication is not truly synchronous, as it counts the data to be written to the slave node, when it is written to the LDF file, not when it is committed to the actual database. This cause a problem when you are load balancing transactions across synchronous nodes.

I have been using it for over seven years, including 2008 (5/10) and 2012 (6/10) versions. We also have an early release of 2016 (8/10) which I have tested, but it's not in our production environment.

We deploy multiples of these servers now and it is all managed via PowerShell scripts and templates. It does not play nicely with hyper-threading, so we disable this now by default.

If there is flapping of Always-On database node, SQL Server will break the replication to the child nodes, and it requires manual intervention to restart replication.

Currently no as we use our own load balancer to enable us to scale to any level.

A strong knowledge of AD is a must as well as the ability to decipher MSFT blog posts.

We did it in-house.

Depending on how the product is used, it will take about 12 months.

Chose your database based on traffic type and desired functionality not on initial cost.

Take a look at the environment you plan to implement including the application and traffic model. Consider using Azure DB depending on your implementation requirements.

• SQL server has dynamic resource allocation feature that allows disk and memory usage scale to meet changing database demands. This facility provides better performance and simplifies software management.• SQL Server’s Graphical Query Analyzer not only helps building stored procedures and interactive queries but also graphically displays the steps performed by query processor to execute the query. • SQL Server’s Online Analytical Processing (OLAP) provides services like data warehousing, data marts and decision support to many medium sized companies.• Data Transformation Services is a powerful and flexible tool provided by SQL server, it simplifies importing and exporting data between and OLE-DB compatible databases.

• Installation and operation of SQL Server requires Internet Explorer (IE). • Reloading all the data in a database can cause potential data loss especially when the size of database is large. • No Cascading declarative referential integrity is available in SQL server.

Microsoft SQL Server is the tool of choice for many corporate environments because it is a commercial database server. Its core role in the commercial world is only to store data which is slightly different than other databases like MS Access. In addition to data storage capability, MS Access allows developing a full user interface for data entry and reports generation. Whereas SQL Server simply stores data. Significant numbers of companies are moving to SQL Server. When it comes to costs SQL will very often make a very good business case.

• SQL Server provide end users and database programmers with a broad spectrum of services such as Analysis and Reporting services, Data Engine, Integration Services thus making database development and management easier and reliable. • SQL Server offers a platform on which data in all levels- structured, semi-structured, and unstructured data can be managed, integrated and analyzed thus enabling an organization to realize its mission-critical information. • Latest versions of SQL Server provide a handy development studio that not only make the creation of database objects easy but also offer useful tools such Object Explorer to allow quick processes.

• SQL Server work best with Windows Operating System and it is not compatible with some other systems hence limiting its platform friendliness. • Advance versions with higher functionality such as Work Group Edition have high installation requirement such as multi-processor computers, larger primary memory and are not open source.

• Database developers who want to have a clear logical and physical understanding of database systems will no doubt benefit much from using SQL Server. I personally marvel at the extensible support provided by the management studio especially on disk and file management as I enjoy using SQL Server 2008. SQL Server is friendly to both beginners and experts and its installation process can be customized to suite different features.

We are using it for accounts payable and accounts receivable automation. We make accounts payable and accounts receivable solutions, and we're using SQL Server as one of the building blocks.

It is integrated with Microsoft tools.

The stored procedure integration with our development could be better. Things are always changing very fast at Microsoft, and it takes a lot of resources to get on top of it. We're struggling with version control.

In terms of new features, we don't have any feature requests. We are not focusing on the database.

I have been using SQL Server for 17 years.

Its stability is okay.

Its scalability is okay.

Their technical support is okay.

It is something we have been using for a lot of years. If we're paying, it should be reasonable.

I would recommend looking at other solutions. You can also look at the Azure SQL implementation because it is easier to start with.

I would rate SQL Server a seven out of ten.

Private Cloud

It is widely used and we never have problems with it. It can handle a PC, and it can also handle huge data. It is fast and efficient. It is something unique that tracks reporting of records, personnel, finances and more. It also integrates well with everything, not just Microsoft tools. 

It would be nice to search for specific value across multiple tables. This would save a lot of time. 

More than five years.

I have never had a problem with the stability of the solution. 

We have never really had a problem with the scalability of the solution. 

I have never used technical support. It is the joke at the office that you cannot get help on the Microsoft website at all. Also, downloading anything from Microsoft is usually a nightmare. Honestly, I end up googling the problem and solving it myself. This is definitely something Microsoft needs to improve.

It is definitely important for someone looking at a new vendor to consider the support of the solution. In addition, the customer should really do their research and understand what their needs are, and make sure the new solution will solve those needs. 

My background is primarily in software development, and I use SQL Server among other tools in that capacity. SQL Server was one of the main databases in my previous company, and it is used for storing data from different applications.

It is easy to use and easy to perform a backup.

It is easy to find resources that can manage SQL Server.

In my experience, I've found that scalability can be improved.

I have used SQL Server while working for different companies.

This is a stable product.

We have between 40 and 50 applications running on it, which are used by many people.

The support from Microsoft is good.

The installation is simple.

We have an in-house team for deployment and maintenance.

One administrator is suitable for managing it.

In summary, this is a good product and I recommend it.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

On-premises