MySQL over Microsoft SQL Server

by Shigom H
After several hours of reading Microsoft support articles on how to install Microsoft SQL Server 2008 on my machine, I finally got everything to work.  However, for the amount of time sacrificed I wanted to find some significant differences between MySQL and Microsoft SQL Server.  To my surprise, I found out that MySQL 5.1(150MB) is about the same size as Microsoft’s  .NET framework,  a necessary component in the installation of  Microsoft SQL Server 2008(2GB). A possibly bias article entitled “Why Move to MySQL from Microsoft SQL Server” written by one of MySQL’s director Robert Schamuer,  makes a strong case for MySQL.

The article does not hesitate to compare the installation time of Microsoft SQL Server to MySQL. In less than 15 minutes you can download, install, and start working on your MySQL database project. I wish the same applied for Microsoft SQL Server 2008, but unfortunately Microsoft SQL Server fails miserably in this category. Okay, maybe the wait is well-warranted because a larger file usually means more/better features.  However, the author points out that a big file doesn’t always translate to more features or better performance.  MySQL actually has more features because it is open-source, available on many platforms, and has a pluggable storage engine architecture.  Many DBA’s  admire the flexibility offered with MySQL’s support for different storage engines. This means that a DBA can have both transactional and non-transactional tables with a degree of ease.  MySQL also supports different types of partitioning(range, hash, key, list) whereas SQL Server only offers range partitioning.   The article does mention that Microsoft SQL Server offers better security, optimization,  and data auditing abilities.

Summary from article:

The reason I chose this article is because I was very frustrated with the installation process of Microsoft SQL server. I also came across a helpful website that allows aspiring Database workers to demonstrate their knowledge through solving a handful of exercises that challenge your ability manipulate data through statements. Or it could just serve as a good review for our project and upcoming exam. Some exercises incorporate MySQL 5.5 while others use SQL Server 2008 R2, thus I had to know the differences between the two. After reading the article,  I was more impressed with MySQL for the reasons outlined in the table above. Maybe is about time CPP starts transitioning away from Microsoft products and into the main-stream arena. Also, the website I came across for learning SQL: .

Schumacher, R. (n.d.). MySQL :: Why Move to MySQL from Microsoft SQL Server?. MySQL :: Developer Zone. Retrieved November 12, 2012, from

3 thoughts on “MySQL over Microsoft SQL Server

  • November 12, 2012 at 12:03 am

    Shigom, you’ve convinced me to like MySQL, but I read in an article that Microsoft SQL has a gain in compatibility with Microsoft Windows and Office, you have some better tools, more wizards, and MS-Access. You can control the OS and the applications so everything works together with a smoothness, which is not possible with MySQL.

  • November 12, 2012 at 12:06 am

    I had some troubles while installing the MSSQL Server 2008 R2 Express Edition on my computer. I had to install twice to get it working right so I share your pain. On the other hand, I believe that MSSQL provides other services, such as Reporting and Analysis, for business intelligence. For enterprise level analysis, I believe that MSSQL Server is more suitable.

  • November 12, 2012 at 2:15 pm

    I am also having trouble installing Microsoft SQL. When I first installed it I found out I installed the wrong version of SQL as the copy I had did not have Management Studio. When I installed it again, it did not ask for any of my user information this time and was not able to connect to a server. It was frustrating as each installation took about 40 minutes and I found out that it didn’t install the correct version or properly. I don’t understand why Microsoft made it so complicated for SQL installation compared to their other products like Word or Office.

Comments are closed.