We just raised a $30M Series A: Read our story

Top 8 Relational Databases Tools

SQL ServerOracle DatabaseMySQLSAP HANATeradataIBM Db2 DatabaseMariaDBIBM Informix
  1. leader badge
    One of the best features of SQL Server is the efficient retrieval of information.A valuable feature of the solution is that it is comparatively simpler to manage than Oracle.
  2. leader badge
    The thing two things that I like most about Oracle Database are its scalability and performance. The solution is stable and has good performance.
  3. Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, Oracle, SAP and others in Relational Databases. Updated: October 2021.
    542,721 professionals have used our research since 2012.
  4. The deployment process is pretty fast.It is free, which is probably its most valuable feature. It is a pretty full-featured relational database. It really does everything we need it to do.
  5. Eases management of databases. The in-memory computing and the efficient response time are very good features.
  6. Teradata has good performance, the response times are very fast. Overall the solution is easy to use. When we do the transformation, we have all of our staging and aggregation data available.
  7. IBM Db2 Database has good performance.Your iOS, your throughputs, your performance cycles, you cannot touch it with Microsoft or with Oracle scalability-wise. That is far and away the most scalable systems and the highest performing systems of the set of them.
  8. report
    Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Relational Databases solutions are best for your needs.
    542,721 professionals have used our research since 2012.
  9. From a customer perspective, MariaDB is a good choice for cluster configuration. It's also easy to operate and cheap. The solution's high availability is its most valuable aspect.
  10. So far, we do not have a lot of issues. It's pretty problem-free. The initial setup is pretty easy.

Advice From The Community

Read answers to top Relational Databases questions. 542,721 professionals have gotten help from our community of experts.
DLAM
I work for a healthcare company with less than 1,000 employees. I am new to FileMaker Pro but my company uses FileMaker Pro (FM Pro) as the frontend development tool. More and more applications will be built using FM Pro.   In the long run :  1. Is FM Pro Embedded DB or MS SQL Server a better choice in the long run for the backend database? 2. What are the pros and cons of using these two databases if we must use FileMaker Pro as the front end tool? 3. If MS SQL Server has been chosen, will there be any compromise with FileMaker Pro on areas such as functionalities, features, programming methods, etc? Thanks! I appreciate your help. 
author avatarJeremy Cox
User

In general, I think that because FM is a closed system that uses its internal DB to handle not just the data used by the app but the data upon which the app itself is built. This and because the company's preference to use basic JDBC/ODBC or pre-built plug-in access to external data sources, the answer will depend on whether or not you're committed to the FM platform itself. If so, over the long run, you're better off sticking with that as a total package, backing up to an external, more traditional db. This way, you won't run into any performance, security, and management issues that would be inherent in using an external DB as the main source of app data. Honestly, given the closed nature of FM, if it's possible to migrate away, I'd suggest looking into an alternative like Caspio, which is actually built on top of MS SQL server running on AWS.

Here are a few more thoughts in response to your questions as well:

1. Is FM Pro Embedded DB or MS SQL Server a better choice in the long run for the backend database?

Overall, MS SQL Server should be your preference in terms of scalability, security, manageability, and functionality. But as mentioned above, it's only supported at arms-length by FM.

2. What are the pros and cons of using these two databases if we must use FileMaker Pro as the front end tool?

I think if you focus on using the FM DB to handle the build/maintenance of the low-code app itself and simply query an external DB like MS SQL Server for customer-generated (not app artifact) data, then you'll have the best of both worlds. But that will come at a cost in performance, management, security, etc. as mentioned above. Given that you're in healthcare, I'd strongly suggest this approach, as I do not see the same levels of data privacy/security within FM compared to what comes native and as an add-on within MS SQL Server.

3. If MS SQL Server has been chosen, will there be any compromise with FileMaker Pro on areas such as functionalities, features, programming methods, etc?

Yes, you won't be able to fully use MS SQL except as a source of data to populate the FM app front end. If you try to use MS SQL to manage app artifacts, I think the whole app will fall down, sadly or at a minimum only function as a basic app.

author avatarDenisMunger
Real User

FileMaker pro compared to MS access:

FileMaker server plays the role ms SQL does.

For 1000 users, you need a client/server architecture.

So your question is about choosing the DB server and the frontend.

In the long run, MS SQL has more acceptance in enterprises than Apple. But MSSQL is much more popular because it’s free.

When it comes to database, access privileges should be your first concern. Are you going to use your current LDAP / AD database? Or will you rebuild an entirely new security schema and maintain it in parallel?

Then you need to address database size and the number of transactions/seconds.

And development and maintainability. If you pick a software more generally accepted in the industry, it should bring savings and easier staff recruitment.

author avatarAlessandra Guarino
User

We are about 30 employees and we are changing Sap HANA to MySQL into our application for non-technical losses for Utilities due to the final cost to end-user.

author avatarMohammadAmin Mesbahi
User

1: Be sure that MS SQL Server is a better choice for your case because you can use your data much simpler for further reporting, integrating, and managing.
2: MS SQL Server is more expensive at start time but your TCO will fewer in the long term. MS SQL Server gives you more advantages with your data management and insight.

author avatarChrichtianNeal
Real User

I have used FM Pro for a paperless construction site and it work seamlessly.

author avatarTs Nurul Haszeli
Real User

1. It depends on your needs. Latest FM Pro has supported many things including Rest API. However, it is a proprietary system, not many developers used it and not many companies implemented it. You may face difficulties getting advice or help if you come across any issues.


2. Of course, when you use FM Pro as the front-end, it will be much easier to use its database as it is already fine-tuned for the complete solution. 


3. I did not see any issues except that you may need extra work to fine-tune MS SQL Server to ensure the database is fully optimized for FM Pro utilization.

author avatarChrichtian Neal
Real User

So, there you have it... your short-term and long-term objectives would drive your decision better. TrustRadius did a side-by-side analysis below:

https://www.trustradius.com/compare-products/filemaker-pro-vs-sql-server


Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, Oracle, SAP and others in Relational Databases. Updated: October 2021.
542,721 professionals have used our research since 2012.