[ronack]

If you have the money MSSQL is a better all-purpose RDBMS. The tooling is in a completely different league and there are fewer surprises with regards to performance (like PG's slow counts, paging, etc.). I very much hope PG will close the gap though.

[combatentropy]

> The tooling is in a completely different league

I keep hearing about Microsoft SQL's tooling. Can someone explain to me, at length even, what "tooling" is?

This is coming from someone who has written dozens of web applications for PostgreSQL. These are business applications with complex rules and complex SQL like window functions, recursive queries, PL/pgSQL functions, and so on. The only tools I had were vim and psql, and I've been completely happy.

Every time I have had to write an application that uses Microsoft SQL (because it was already set up for a related application) I cringe, because it is a hundred times harder.

[atonse]

SQL Server Profiler = awesome. You can basically say "record every query that's going through the server for the next 15 minutes" – and then rerun those queries through a planner (SQL Server Tuning Wizard) to see where you can optimize them by adding certain indexes, etc. It'll even suggest indexes, etc.

So you could basically trace a production workload and then tune it offline.

Doing things like backups in SQL server using the agent, and running various workflows, also works really well. To this day, as far as I can tell, doing backups for most open source databases are a hodgepodge of bash scripts, cron jobs, and *dump executables, which every admin reinvents every single time.

These are all GUI apps that, albeit have barely been updated in a decade, but still better than most first party (or even third party) open source DB management tools out there.

I've heard all the high availability stuff is really good too but I've also heard that it's a pain to setup and until recently, only available in the really expensive enterprise license.

[blitzd]

It's not usually that simple with profiler, as production queries can be highly contextual and aren't always 'replayable' unless they're interacting on the same data as the original. It can also be pretty high impact on a busy system.

Agent is nice because of the surrounding infrastructure -scheduling, notifications, etc - that said, it still often ends up being a hodgepodge that every admin reinvents, just using different underlying structures (cron=scheduling, system mail=notifications, etc).

And yeah, the HA stuff is good - with the setup becoming gradually easier with each new version, but those license costs are definitely reflecting that.

While SQL Server does have some great features - it's also missing a fair bit of functionality. I.e., there's no real 'overview' of how the system is performing. Look at SQLSentry for an idea of what I mean - I only manage one 'major' database, but without that tool I'd be hard pressed to keep up. There's also things that have been broken for years now which they've failed to address - i.e., one of the most popular add-ons for SQL Studio is SQL Prompt to get actual working intellisense. They can manage it for multiple extensible languages in visual studio, but flub it for years with the fairly static TSQL. I actually thought it must have been a fairly complex problem until I saw JetBrains implement it for multiple variations of SQL in DataGrip.

[junto]

SQL Server ships with a number of "tools". I.e. applications that are pretty awesome.

SQL Server Management tool is a great core user interface to managing database servers and databases. Other tools that are commonly used by developers include the rather awesome query planner, query profiler, performance analyser and data import and export tool.

There are lots more told available for data warehousing / OLAP etc that are not so commonly used by most developers. SQL server is undoubtedly tool rich.

[callesgg]

There is no such thing as have the money, every expense chips away from the profits.

Edit. I understand that it weighs against development time but that is a different matter than money in the bag.

[cwyers]

Except for ones that increase revenue or allow offsetting costs in other areas.

Having used MySQL and SQL Server, there's not much of a contest. You can do everything in both, pretty much, but you can do it more quickly and more maintainably in SQL Server. The developer tools are all really good, the functionality is outstanding, it requires less care and feeding. There are plenty of cases where the added money isn't worth it. But your time has value, too.

[blakeyrat]

I wager the labor savings from SQL Server will pay for itself in a few months.

[blitzd]

It's been my finding that experienced MS SQL developers tend to hire out at a much greater cost than experienced MySQL developers... MS SQL Standard also starts at $3,700+ USD per core (and a minimum purchase of 4 core license, I believe), with a yearly SA fee on top of that. You could use Express, but it's missing many features - SQL Agent for instance.

[edgyswingset]

At some point, you end up paying more for your employees to manage stuff than build stuff. That's when you buy better tools.