We performed a comparison between SAP IQ and SQL Server based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Relational Databases Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Columnar storage allows high compression, high load rates and high query performance."
"The column-based technologies (basically all the database for ITP) are used for SAP IQ. It is used as a column-based solution."
"Unbeatable speed and compression with a colummn-structured relational database."
"The primary benefit of SAP IQ is its ability to limit the expansion of the costly SAP HANA database, which has limited storage capacity. This necessitates a form of data management that involves moving data from SAP HANA to SAP NLS, which is essentially archiving. This allows us to retain access to the data via a link whenever it is required."
"It is very robust for ad hoc DW queries and its columnar compression is unique and valuable."
"Valuable features for us include the compression, speed, fast response time, and easy object maintenance."
"Very good security features."
"Enables us to convert to bigger DBs and more easily move or upgrade between branches."
"There was an online system in which we had about 2500 requests to the DB per second. Every request had a completion window of one second to process and retrieve data. After switching to SQL Server, and AlwaysOn, and Snapshot, and tinkering, and configuring and tinkering, the handling capacity we measured increased to about 5000 requests per second, while the time decreased to 0.5 seconds per request."
"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."
"We have found the solution to be scalable."
"It's a very capable, efficient, price-performant OLAP server."
"The product’s most valuable features are flexibility and scalability."
"SQL Server is quite stable. And now we are using the Lattice 2017 version."
"Concurrency and functional error messaging."
"Multiplex is very problematic. There are consistency problems in the metadata, meaning it is possible to lose metadata consistency. You should make sure you have healthy backups."
"The room for improvement would be the marketing of the product, because this product is much better than advertised."
"The solution works best when combined with other SAP solutions. If the environment has other systems other options might be better."
"The organization who owns the product does not support it well and appears not to be doing significant development for the future."
"I think the universe should be part of the Sybase IQ tool set."
"The UX design of this system needs improvement."
"Performance could be improved. There could be more support to PHP-based websites and to providing direct plugins for connections, and the related services or application services could be improved."
"I would like to see SQL Server add the ability to write to multiple sites or support replication between multiple sites at the transaction level."
"SQL Server could improve by being more user-friendly, it is still geared towards specialists. Additionally, the monitoring system is difficult to use, not everyone can use it well. The configuration should be able to be done through the GUI."
"Improvements to the indexing, columnstore indexing, and high availability groups are good improvements for future versions."
"The solution is expensive. The licensing costs are high."
"When we are talking about event space architecture, scalability generally comes into play. For example, I might have a hundred thousand transactions a second, and then all of a sudden, I build something that everybody in the world wants. The next thing I know is that I have a million transactions a second. So, to be able to process the throughput, I'd have to scale up, and then when the holidays are over, I'm again down to a hundred thousand transactions, and I want to scale back down. SQL Server is not going to do that. In this way, it is not very scalable. One of the reasons why they want us to use Kafka is so that if we need to, we can do that, but our base program is on SQL Server. So, this is where we would use a Kafka event stack so that if I need more servers, I can just write a command, and I can have more consumers, more brokers, and more producers, and when the holiday season is over, it scales right back down again. SQL Server is not going to do that."
"The performance could improve."
SAP IQ is ranked 21st in Relational Databases Tools with 17 reviews while SQL Server is ranked 1st in Relational Databases Tools with 260 reviews. SAP IQ is rated 8.0, while SQL Server is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of SAP IQ writes "Easy to use, highly stable, but integration could improve". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SQL Server writes "Easy to use and provides good speed and data recovery". SAP IQ is most compared with Snowflake, SAP HANA, SAP BW4HANA, Apache Hadoop and SAP Adaptive Server Enterprise, whereas SQL Server is most compared with MariaDB, SAP HANA, Oracle Database, LocalDB and IBM Db2 Database. See our SAP IQ vs. SQL Server report.
See our list of best Relational Databases Tools vendors.
We monitor all Relational Databases Tools reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
