Oracle Database Reviews

I primarily deal with infrastructure and do not manage applications but in the company, we use Oracle for our financial applications.

Oracle is a product that is easy to use.

The interface is user-friendly.

Oracle is not easy to integrate with other systems, which is something that should be improved.

I began using Oracle approximately 10 years ago.

This is a stable database product and we plan to continue using it.

Oracle Database is scalable. We have approximately 100 users in the organization.

I have not been in contact with Oracle's technical support.

We use SQL in other applications, including Salesforce.

The initial setup is complex.

We had assistance from a third party that we outsourced for the deployment. It was a two-person team of engineers.

Licensing is on a yearly basis.

Oracle Database is a popular product that is used around the world and has a very large market share, compared to SAP.

In summary, this is a product that is really stable and flexible with a user-friendly interface, and I recommend it.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

We primarily use the solution for Oracle E-Business suites. It's the database for ERP.

The data replication is the most valuable aspects of the solution. We've got Oracle Data Guard set up and we've got two sites - one in Johannesburg and one in Cape Town. We do data replication every 30 minutes from one site to the other.

The initial setup is straightforward.

You can scale the solution without any issues.

The great thing about the solution is that it comes with pretty much everything. SQL Developer is part of it, and you can scale databases from 20 users to 50,000 users. It's actually a very solid database.

The listener could be improved. The listener could be far more easily configurable. If you want to change ports or add a fail-over listener, it could be a little bit more seamless.

The solution is very, very expensive. This keeps it as a niche product.

I've been using Oracle for 15 or 20 years. It's been well over a decade and maybe as much as two. It's been a while.

The solution can really scale if you need it to. We've scaled it up a few times in the environment and we've never had any issue. From that point of view, everything seems to be good.

We have about 2,500 users on the solution.

We've been in touch with Oracle on a daily basis. We just moved to another version. They really helped us. They were helpful and responsive. We're satisfied with the level of support we receive.

The initial setup is not complex. it's very straightforward. A company shouldn't have any issues with the implementation process. It's very easy.

We have our own team that handles the maintenance as necessary.

It's really expensive, however, that's what makes Oracle a niche player. It's not something every company can have its own. It's for the elite, it's for the prestige. It's for the ones who really do good business.

We are customers and end-users.

Recently, we've upgraded EBS to a later version.

I'd recommend the solution to other organizations. That said, it all depends on what you're trying to support. I use it in conjunction with their EBS, so, for me, it's the perfect fit. You can't split it anyway. Oracle EBS only works with an Oracle Database.

I'd rate the solution ten out of ten overall.

We primarily use the solution for auditing purposes.

The best feature of the solution is the capability of running extreme processes for database processing requirements.

From a database product perspective, I would say, they're good in what they provide. There's not much concern.

For our organization, the price is the main factor that needs improvement. They charge you exorbitantly for a license, and, I would say, they are not doing justice to today's industry requirements when it comes to a pricing model. They talk about cloud hybrid on-prem solutions, and they tell you that you have a cloud solution that will benefit your company considerably, however, it's just a lot of cut-throat pricing that they offer.

From the perspective of using the database in a legacy product, some people are usually stuck with it, and they need to continue working on that. That's a new thing they have not been able to change. The licensing model works in a different way altogether. It's not really very friendly for management to take decisions when it comes to executing licensing right for a product like this.

If their database encryption features could come in bytes, that would be a major improvement. They should bring the encryption model to their standard databases as well.

We've been using the solution for about seven years now.

In terms of stability, it's got a little bit more stability than it used to be. It's good. It's been quite stable, however, I believe the stability is limited to a standard model of licensing that we are provided.

Technical support has been very good for us. We have no complaints. We're satisfied with the level of service we've been provided. They are very helpful.

The licensing costs are very high. We feel the solution is price gouging its customers.

The solution has a standard license, which is different from an enterprise license. If you need the encryption feature, you need to go up to enterprise licensing which has a whole lot of other features that you may not even be using. Encryption is a top requirement in the industry, however, you're forced to use the enterprise edition if you need to use anything like this. That said, it is always better to go to a standard edition, which has more limited capabilities but can still fit into your product perspective.

I'm not reselling this product. I'm using this for designing my own product, and I'm giving it as a solution to my customer. If I need to work out pricing for my customer, there may be my own raw materials that come into play.

The raw materials that come into play should be considered in order to make a better pricing model, which in turn can help me get a better solution for my clients. If the base product that you use is so expensive, like this is, it doesn't make sense. I would start looking at other products. That's what I'm doing. I need to better scale my capabilities.

I'd recommend Mongo Database over this product for that reason.

I'd rate the solution overall eight out of ten. It's very good. It's just a bit too expensive for my purposes.

I use Oracle Database to manage my organization's data stores.

Oracle Database has made my organization's data highly available.

It runs on scalable operating systems like Linux, AIX, and Solaris. It uses very many different types of indexes to improve performance. It has automatic memory management capability and large file capability.

The Oracle Database could improve on integration with other infrastructure systems like Active Directory.

The most important features are container and pluggable database. Now we have more control on the resource level, resource planning, where we can segregate our application based on the pluggable database and utilize the resources better.

The hardware cost and the maintenance cost, because we don't need to buy multiple servers. We don't need to engage so many DBAs. Instead we can put multiple databases in one container database.

Stability features should be there. And the performance, we are not expecting better performance as of now. They must include bug fixes and release a better version of their 12c Database.

It is pretty stable, but since it's only the very first version they released, I would say probably they're going to fix it in release 2.

It scales well so far, no issues at all, but some of the advanced features are pretty expensive, especially on engineered systems like Exadata.

We are getting good results for service requests, but sometimes we see too much delay. Sometimes we see their investigation is going in the wrong direction. They have to improve a bit in order to provide support. 

For example, I have three or four service requests going on with Oracle, and I have seen so many delays, and asking unnecessary questions, which I would not have expected from Oracle.

Upgrading is not an issue. As long as our application is supporting the upgrade. We can upgrade from 11g to 12c without any issues. 

But we have seen issues where we are upgrading our databases from 8i or 9i to 12c. Those versions are still not very compatible with 12c.

We have been with Oracle Database for a long time. Our products are stable on Oracle Database except some performance issues.

My advice is to check the application side, what applications they are going to attach to Oracle Database. Make sure the applications are fully compatible with the Oracle Database.

The high availability and the performance are the top-most valuable features.

Because we are servicing the end clients, I need to meet the SLA. The performance is the key prize for us. When a customer comes in and logs into the website, that needs to happen within a few seconds for the SLA. That's how it's helped us; improved performance and, ultimately, gain the customer’s satisfaction.

Right now, we are on the version that is just one lower than what's available. I'm looking forward to upgrading to that version, especially the container-based database. That's what I'm looking forward to.

It is a very stable product, especially the RAC node clusters. If one goes down, it's very seamless; you have other nodes backing up.

It's easy to scale; you can add more memory or more storage if you need to scale. Horizontally, you can add one more node. It's a pretty scalable product.

We have used technical support when we have had some issues. It's pretty good; a very good support model. You create a service request and they, depending on the priority, call us back. It's pretty good support.

I did not previously use a different solution; we've been using this one.

Initial setup was complex; it's very complex work.

We decided to choose this product because it is a very solid, robust product, and because of the better features and so on; that's why.

I definitely encourage checking out this solution. Work with Oracle; they're pretty good at coming to your site, giving demos and so on.

The top-most important criteria when I’m choosing a vendor such as Oracle is the support model and the willingness to work with us.

In my opinion, it's one of the strongest databases available in the world. It's very robust and you can do the tuning. You can tune it and customize it the way that you need it.

Its RMAN backups are really complex. I'm not a DBA, there should be a better way to perform those backups.

We have had no issues with deployment.

It's been very stable, and that's one of the best features. It very rarely has bugginess.

RAC can be simplified, basically like ASM. RAC DBAs need to really follow their processes because if one thing goes down, bringing up CRS would be a nightmare, even for a DBA who specializes in RAC. It's not a regular database and you need to learn the internals of it. Troubleshooting it is very different because it's tightly integrated with the ATC process of the Linux OS.

It would be much better if there certain values available. If those values aren't available, don't bother trying to integrate it with the OS. You should run your own shell, which is something I think would be better.

It's not that easy to migrate and you can get stuck. It depends on the level of experience, but if it's for a fresh migration, it's fairly complex. Once you get the hang of it, though, it's not that difficult.

We implemented it ourselves with our in-house team.

It's expensive, that's for sure. Because if any of the other databases are compared, Oracle Database is the only expensive product out there. Open Source products like Cassandra, MongoDB, NoSQL, those are the pretty much the same job. Oracle Database, though, might be the fastest RDBMS database we've seen. That might be the reason that it's expensive. It's also the market leader and they own a large market share.

If you are using E-Business Suite, you don't have any other option to explore another database. Depending on the nature of business, if you don't need an RDBMS, go with an open source database which would be much easier to manage and, particularly, to grow vertically instead of just horizontally.

The most valuable features for us are its capability and reliability. It's the best performing database solution I've used, and it's dependable, rarely going down or exhibiting instabilities.

We have a lot of applications that are critical to our business running on Oracle Database. I think it's pretty feature rich, although we don't use all of the features that are available. It's a very solid platform for applications, giving us confidence in the data it maintains and our access to it.

There are so many applications that run with Oracle Database that it's difficult getting our various IT personnel to get tested and certified for it. It's like herding cats. And although the upgrades are not technically difficult, it is difficult to manage all the applications and the people who work with it.

We're mostly on version 11.2.0.4. We've played just a little bit with version 12.

We've had no issues with deployment.

It's very solid. We've had no issues with Oracle DB being unstable. Again, its reliability is one of the best features for us.

We have not had to scale it to a great degree, but we've had no real issues with capacity and we have confidence that Oracle DB will scale as needed.

Technical support is generally quite good. We've been overall very satisfied with Oracle's support.

I was involved in the setup of it 25 years ago and it was a transition to Unix at the time. I can't say it was that straightforward, but It was also not unexpectedly complicated.

We generally do a major Oracle version upgrade every year or two and do a major patch upgrade at least once a year if we don't do a major version upgrade. We do upgrades in-house.

I've seen that things are evolving very fast since we first installed Oracle DB 25 years ago and since I've been a DBA for the last 30 years. We've got a lot of expertise in database administration. Honestly, that's being de-emphasized by the cloud offerings for the whole data center. Having people look at rack hardware and install the operating system is being de-emphasized. I think somebody starting out, if they are a not a big operation, they ought to look seriously at using the cloud as an alternative to having to support a lot of IT functions in-house.