MS SQL server is a legacy system. I don't think any business would create a new database using SQL server unless, for some technical reason, they don't have any other option.
Azure SQL Database for a long while has been the most cost-effective way of running SQL Server as a PaaS database, and still is if you choose the DTU-based modes, making it a very attractive option. Combined with the rich feature set and maturity and reliability of SQL Server, it is hardly legacy; in fact it's very capable and continues to get new updates like vector operations.
I've helped create apps that support millions to hundreds of millions of revenue on Azure SQL Databases that cost at most a few hundred dollars per month. And you can get started with a S0 database for $15/mo which is absolutely suitable for production use for simple apps.
Unfortunately, I think Microsoft realized how good of a value the DTU-based model was, and has started pushing everyone to the vCore model, which dramatically increases the barrier to entry for Azure SQL Database, making PostgreSQL a much more attractive option. If Microsoft ever kills off the DTU purchasing model of Azure SQL Database, I likely won't be recommending or choosing Azure SQL Database at all going forward. It'll 100% be PostgreSQL.
Yeah, I remember that option - basic tier of DTU DB with 250GB of storage - free for one year, then continue for $15/m.
When the client brought some 3rd party expert and he advised rewriting to MySQL, I quickly did the math and it was like $60/m, without a free year.
We continued with DTU MSSQL with Prisma ORM and never regreted.
There is a parallel world, called enterprise. The enterprise people in this world, like enterprise software. They were born to be enterprise oriented. This is fine. Not everyone is like you and it's ok to use a robust product like MSSQL.
SQL Server is technically very, very good.
But they charge you an arm and a leg for the pleasure, but it can be worthwhile for enterprise.
I spent the early part of my career in MSSQL and the current part in Pg.
MSSQL is extremely, extremely capable as a database engine.
But it also costs an arm and a leg. People who haven't used it don't know just how capable it is.
The Express Edition is a SQL database engine with some limitations on CPU count and memory and missing SQL agent. It is free. I installed the version 2017 on some servers 7 years ago and they still run some supplier portal on it, that team was too lazy to even upgrade to newer versions.
I have worked with multiple ex-SQL Server engine devs and holy shit are they good.
SQL Server, like Oracle, is technically fantastic. They were both ahead of Postgres for a long time and many people would argue they still are.
The reason people don't use them more often is that they're not free or even inexpensive.
I mean they should be, they backed by huge corporation
plus they can take notes from Open source DB like postgress and improve their system better
The MS SQL Server engine is an improvement over the years of a branch that was always more technically advanced than Postgres. I don't think there is anything to steal from it.
You have it backwards. FOSS projects are still currently learning from SQL Server and Oracle. That may change in the next 5-10 years as Postgres has already become the lingua franca of the DB world.
Legal, compliance, high performance, and familiarity are all valid reasons. (I'm actually not a fan, but less opposed now that it can run on Linux)
SQL Server and Oracle are as actual as ever, regardless of the hate they get on FOSS circles.
>MS SQL server is a legacy system
that's every SQL server out there included Postgres. Is NoSQL considered as none-legacy?