We are using the latest version.
We can use the solution for the same application. On the database side we have Microsoft SQL and on the operating system side we have 2019.
We are using the latest version.
We can use the solution for the same application. On the database side we have Microsoft SQL and on the operating system side we have 2019.
I want to see one improvement and this involves the replication between the DC and DR. We have limited options at the moment and it does not lend sufficient support for the number of databases. This means we have a huge number of databases, topping approximately 2,000. For the moment, this particular replication is not supported by SQL.
The support number of databases needs to be increased, as well as the database number of databases that it supports. That support cannot be found when it comes to the replication between the DC and DR.
I have been using SQL Server for ten years.
The solution is sufficiently stable.
The solution is scalable.
When it comes to the speed, knowledge and customer-friendliness of the technical support, we feel these to be good.
We did not use other solutions prior to SQL Server.
The initial setup is easy, flawless.
It lasts a single day.
We handed the implementation on our own.
This involved a technical team of 15 people.
There is a need to pay for the license for SQL Server. We have an enterprise license, which we consider to be fine.
We have 10,000 customers.
I would recommend the solution to others.
SQL Server is good and I rate it as a nine out of ten.
We primarily use the solution mainly for databases on all types of applications.
SQL is the all around leading Database server
The solution is very stable.
The scalability of the product is great.
We'd like the deployment process to be better in the future.
The licensing is pretty expensive.
I've been using the solution for 20 years at this point. It's been two decades. We've used it for a while now.
The solution is stable and the performance is great. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze.
The product scales well. If you need to expand it, you can do so.
We have 900 to 1,000 people using it currently.
I'm more on the architecture side and therefore do not directly deal with technical support. I cannot speak to how helpful or responsive they are.
We also use Oracle. We've used it for over a decade already.
The deployment could be easier.
While the deployment only takes about 15 minutes, you have to follow up with a lot of configuration.
We handled the implementation ourselves. We did not enlist the assistance of any integrators or consultants. It was all handled in-house.
We're paying too much for licensing at this time. They need to work on the pricing. They could be cheaper, however, it's also difficult to run the licenses in the right way.
We pay licensing fees on a yearly basis.
We're a customer and an end-user. We don't have a business relationship with SQL.
While everything is currently on-premises, we're making moves to shift to the cloud.
We're using the 2019 and 2016 versions of the product.
I'd rate the solution at an eight out of ten. In general, we've been quite happy with its capabilities.
The solution is an RDBMS and can be used to simplify customers' requirements for a back-end database. The main function of the solution is to store information from front-end users.
The most valuable feature of the solution, compared to other RDBMS solutions, such as Oracle MySQL or IBM DB2, it is more user-friendly and has backward compatibility. For example, if you have an application that requires an old version of SQL Server and you have the latest version of the license, you are able to install and use it in backward compatibility mode. They keep supporting the existing legacy application. Additionally, the solution is simple and if it is configured properly it performs very well.
I have used the solution for approximately six years.
I find the solution to be very stable.
The solution is scalable.
The technical support is only provided to the customers having a subscription-based license with a Software Assurance server. For other forms of licensing the solution will not provide support.
I have previously used other RDBMS solutions, such as Oracle MySQL, Maria DB, PostgreSQL, and IBM DB2.
When comparing PostgreSQL, Oracle MySQL, and Microsoft SQL, Microsoft SQL has an advantage over the other two server databases because it provides a graphical user interface by default.
The initial setup of the solution is very easy and the time it takes depends on the architecture required. If the deployment of a cluster is required then the setup may take up to three hours, whereas standard environment deployment needs half an hour.
The solution can be installed by our selves but the use of an integrator makes it much easier.
The solution requires authorization in either the form of perpetual licensing or subscription-based licenses for two years. If a perpetual license version is purchased then customers have it to the end of life, whereas a subscription-based called server with Software Assurance, has to be renewed every two years.
The areas that need improvement are with regards to the commercial aspect of the solution, the licensing cost could be reduced in order to help customers to adopt it.
I would recommend this solution. However, the customer has to make sure it fits their use case.
I rate SQL Server a nine out of ten.
We use this solution to manage our database and store information. I use another platform for more specific needs.
Within our organization, there are roughly 10-12 employees using this solution.
SQL Server consumes a lot of resources. You need to keep an eye on the number of resources involved. It expands and uses all of the memory available on the server. For this reason, I install it on separate machines.
Also, the ability to connect with other environments needs to be improved.
I have been using SQL Server for nearly 10 years.
Scalability-wise, it's okay.
I haven't really experienced any issues that required the assistance of technical support.
I also use MySQL — the open-source version. I started using SQL Server because we required some special functionality for a specific project.
The initial setup was not complicated. You can do it without any external support.
I installed the entire solution myself within 20-50 minutes.
The price could always be lower.
I evaluated Oracle, but I didn't like it — I prefer Microsoft.
I would absolutely recommend this solution to others. Overall, on a scale from one to ten, I would give this solution a rating of eight.
We are using SQL Server for the backend of our SAP and are planning on moving to a cloud version soon.
This solution has helped our organization by providing a backbone for our SAP. We would not be able to operate without it.
We have found the solution valuable because we are able to easily create a query, shrink, backup, and make new tables.
We are using an older version of SQL Server and the migration to a newer version could be made easier.
If you are a new user then this solution could be difficult, they could improve by making the overall usage easier.
In an upcoming release, they could improve the ability to customize the solution.
I have been using SQL Server for approximately ten years.
We have not experienced any problems with the stability of this solution.
SQL Server is scalable.
We have not used the support from Microsoft. However, we did have freelance support a few times.
The installation is very easy. We did not have any challenges.
The price of the solution is very expensive. If I went with the cloud version of SQL a license would cost me approximately 11,000 Riyals per month.
We have a team that has evaluated other solutions before we chose SQL Server, such as Oracle.
I would recommend this solution. However, Oracle has a good reputation for quality that might be a better choice.
I rate SQL Server an eight out of ten.
I have been working on SQL Server for installations, configuring for developers, and for creating backup jobs from the MBF files.
The solution is very easy to use.
SQL Server needs to improve in performance and monitoring because there are no specific monitoring solutions to detect and analyze events for issues in the database. You have to use another monitoring solution. If Microsoft could provide an update to this solution or provide a monitoring solution specifically for SQL Server, it would be very valuable.
I have been using this solution for approximately three years.
I have found the SQL Server stable.
The solution is highly scalable. You are able to implement a SQL cluster mechanism for replicating the data between two nodes of the SQL Server. If one of the nodes is down the second node becomes active.
We have approximately 20 developers working directly with SQL Server and approximately 1,000 end-users that are working on the application that is behind the SQL Server.
The technical support is good. We had a big problem and after an investigation, we could not find the solution. We needed to make use of Microsoft support team and open a specific case on the Microsoft panel. They were able to provide solutions for solving this issue.
I have used MySQL.
The installation is not very complex. However, the process could take a long time because you have to follow the step-by-step instructions for the installation. The time it takes to do the installation is approximately two days.
There is a license required for this solution. One of the problems is for smaller businesses to purchases a license because it is expensive for a lot of them to afford.
I would recommend this solution to others.
I rate SQL Server a seven out of ten.
The solution is a part of a product. We use it for our database, among other items.
The solution is very stable.
The product scales well.
From a security perspective, we have no complaints.
The initial setup is very straightforward.
The solution should work to improve its search functionality.
It would be ideal if the solution offered better integration capabilities. In the future, we expect that our company will need to make more integrations with other systems.
I've been using the solution for three years. It hasn't been that long.
So far, the stability has been very good. We haven't experienced any crashed or anything of that nature. There are no bugs or glitches. It's reliable and the performance is good.
The solution is very scalable. The only thing that would limit its ability to expand is how your environment is designed. That said, a company should have no trouble scaling it if they would like to.
There are only five of us using the solution right now.
We do plan to increase usage in the future.
While I haven't had a chance to open a ticket with technical support, I plan to open one next week, as I have an issue I need to ask them about. However, since I have yet to be in contact, I cannot evaluate their level of service.
The initial setup is not complex or difficult. It's easy. It's very straightforward and the setup guide is available if you Google it. Anyone can search for the installation guide on whichever version you're installing.
The deployment is quick. It only takes about 30 minutes or so.
We have a technical team of five engineers. If any maintenance is needed, we can handle it.
I installed the product myself. I found an installation guide and just followed the directions. I didn't need the help of a consultant or integrator.
We do not currently pay a licensing fee in order to use this product.
I'm currently using the 2017 version. I am not using the latest version of the solution.
In general, I would rate it at an eight out of ten. For the most part, we have been satisfied with its capabilities.
I'd recommend the solution to other users and organizations.
We are a company that possesses data relating to the banking and telecommunications sectors. We use the solution to organize all data received from subscribers and customers.
I feel that this is the simplest of solutions. It is user-friendly, is a robust tool and is always reliable to users. The solution is within the Windows environment. This means that all users, who are already accustomed to Windows, will naturally prefer to use this environment over that of Linux or another operating system.
I would like to have a more directed modeling, to have the flexibility to design all databases using a graphic interface. In other words, the interface integration could be better.
To avoid the need to write code, many users like to use the database diagrams as an overall tool and, as such, the solution should be more flexible and user-friendly.
I have been actively using SQL Server for up to 10 years. I started with programming, moved to databases and am now concentrating on Power BI.
The solution is quite scalable, as it can be extended to replicate many computers. It can be used in a virtual environment. One would, of course, make use of the cloud. We are now gaining experience in cloud programs such as Azure and AWS.
There are two teams which provide technical support. The same team provides support for all these tasks.
The initial setup is not without certain problems. Many users prefer to use Docker in lieu of the original selection. This is more convenient for them owing to certain configurations it possesses. However, if one is incapable of doing this initially he will find it difficult to do at a later date. An example would involve the inclusion of TCP/IP support, which is quite cumbersome. While it is not very difficult, it does require a certain amount of expertise.
We have prepared many virtual machines. Each month we prepare these systems so that they may be ready to meet our needs. This task consumes three to four days per month.
We have a support team who helps our users with deployment. They provide these services to our customers.
When it comes to deployment and maintenance, there are four people responsible for providing the administrative support to us and to our customers.
Our customers do pay license fees for the MS SQL Server but the Rabbit is free, as it is open-source software.
Some who pay for these prefer in-house, on-premises support, while others take a cloud-based approach.
I am also a consultant to SQL Server.
I usually consult with databases, including the Power BI. I started with data business and now shifted to this.
I strongly recommend the solution because we are doing consulting projects using Java applications.
I rate SQL Server as a nine out of ten.
