Likelihood to Recommend Google Cloud Spanner is suited for limitless horizontal scaling while maintaining strong consistency which needs to support ACID. NoSQL databases work in scaling but no ACID support. RDBMS support ACID, but horizontal scaling is not as great. The API it provides result in some limitations to related areas of the code, such as connection pools or database linking framework. So high # of connection pools can vary.
Read full review Although Google Cloud SQL has room for improvement by addressing a minor lack of features, its features and services keep it high among other SQL database products. It is very fast compared to others. Since it is cloud-based, maintenance is also easier. Integration capabilities are also more than expected.
Read full review Pros Super high availability Scales automatically High standard SLA Read full review Highly scalable without worrying about sudden transaction explosion during peak hours. Highly available with multiple geographical locations and regions for nearly 0 downtime to the users. Extremely reliable and responsive for high latency applications due to superb networking at the core. Read full review Cons Support for Views Support for more databases (schemas). More index types that can be supported (Functional) Backups (ie table/data backup) if data is deleted or truncate by accident. Read full review Increasing support for more database engines may enable a wider range of application needs to be met. Implementing and updating cutting-edge security features on a constant basis. Streamlining and enhancing the tools for transferring data to Google Cloud SQL from on-premises databases or other cloud providers. Read full review Usability Basically on personal experience. Google Cloud SQL is an excellent database for a large number of varied use cases. Often the only necessary change is a single line change in a config file and setup some accesses. It is fast enough almost all the time and a breeze to set up. Lack of stored procedures and in TDE encryption is the only reason which it not a 10/10
Read full review Support Rating GCP support in general requires a support agreement. For small organizations like us, this is not affordable or reasonable. It would help if Google had a support mechanism for smaller organizations. It was a steep learning curve for us because this was our first entry into the cloud database world. Better documentation also would have helped.
Read full review Alternatives Considered At that point, we were looking at something [that] can hold our relational database, [...] provide stable connection, and maintain high ACID transition.
BigTable is for nonrelational database so it was out of our [sight] very quickly. BigQuery is a data warehouse that can hold huge amount of data but not ideal for transition. AWS RDS is [...] similar to Spanner but because most of our services are already on GCP, so we went with Spanner.
Read full review Google SQL was great as a first SQL provision. It quickly enabled the apps to be built and scaled as needed for a while. It was robust and adaptable as needed and easy to export as needed when ready, depending on growth. Cost-wise, it's a good choice and requires little investment to get going.
Read full review Return on Investment Backups specifically if transactional data is deleted. Restoring made us lose time. Sharding on Horizontal level was quick and easy. Deployment and increasing nodes is easy Large dataset handling. ACID compliance Read full review With managed database system, it has given us near 100% data availability It has also improved web layer experience with faster processing and authentication using database fields Google Cloud SQL also gels up well with Google Analytics and other analytics systems for us to join up different data points and process them for deeper dives and analysis Read full review ScreenShots Google Cloud SQL Screenshots