We performed a comparison between CockroachDB and SAP HANA based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Relational Databases Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The initial setup and deployment are simple."
"The availability and the easy to use feature is the most valuable. The documentation is also good."
"CockroachDB is highly reliable."
"I use CockroachDB to test big data samples and to create the best structure for databases. We have four users and required 10 people for deployment and maintenance."
"The product has valuable security features."
"The best feature of CockroachDB is the ability to keep the nodes in different locations."
"The tool's most valuable feature is node syncing, which takes only 0.54 milliseconds."
"The subset of SQL that my client is using is completely supported."
"It's sufficed all of our requirements. We primarily needed it to run SAP applications, like NetWeaver or S/4HANA, and it has been really good at that."
"The in-memory database is excellent."
"If you want to scale with new processes and new reports, that's fairly easy."
"Some functions have good performance."
"SAP HANA's best features are its programmability and extensibility - you can size and shape the software however you need."
"The most valuable features I have found are speed, dashboard, and reporting."
"Its in-memory capabilities are good, which is why many companies still use it."
"It is difficult for me to narrow down what the best features are in SAP HANA because they work together to provide the overall functionality of the solution. However, the Fiori application is very good."
"The closer they can make CockroachDB to being completely compatible with Postgres, the better. It's almost compatible, but not completely. If it was, it would be nice to just be able to use Postgres libraries without any fiddling."
"The initial setup and pricing could be improved."
"We are looking for more features to support distributed high availability and geo-partitioning."
"I find the serverless offer a bit confusing."
"The platform could be more extensible."
"Cockroach does not support all types of protocols. I need to improve it myself to support a CouchDB on my network."
"CockroachDB needs to improve store processes."
"The product must improve its disaster recovery features."
"The bid process needs to be improved."
"There's an issue in the partition. When you record more than two million records, partitioning does not work well. In Oracle it's easy. SAP must resolve this issue in order to be more competitive with Oracle."
"The performance and integration with other products are areas in need of improvement."
"SAP HANA is not strong like Oracle when it comes to finance. They are only strong with the logistic business project."
"The releases need to be more stable. It's surprising to still encounter significant bugs after ten years of the product being available."
"The solution's development platform should be more flexible and scalable to adapt to other solutions."
"The initial setup was pretty complex, considering the enormous amount of data they had from an Oracle ERP."
"The user experience should be better. Its user interface is not good. I also don't like the transition concept."
CockroachDB is ranked 10th in Relational Databases Tools with 10 reviews while SAP HANA is ranked 3rd in Relational Databases Tools with 81 reviews. CockroachDB is rated 8.0, while SAP HANA is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of CockroachDB writes "Open source with extensive documentation and a University for training". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SAP HANA writes "Excellent compatibility between modules and the control". CockroachDB is most compared with Oracle Database, MySQL, Citus Data, Amazon Aurora and Teradata, whereas SAP HANA is most compared with Oracle Database, SQL Server, MySQL, IBM Db2 Database and Apache Spark. See our CockroachDB vs. SAP HANA report.
See our list of best Relational Databases Tools vendors.
We monitor all Relational Databases Tools reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.