Oracle Database Reviews

We use Oracle Database for automatic banking systems to store the information about the accounts, the card being used, and all the other customer profile information.

The performance and reliability are the best features of the Oracle Database.

The client-side of Oracle Database could improve. The client graphic user interface works on Java and sometimes it freezes, these should be fixed.

I have been using Oracle Database for approximately 10 years.

The solution is stable.

Oracle Database is scalable, it is one of the most scalable solutions.

We have approximately 1,000 users using this solution. We plan to increase usage in the future.

The support is very good, they have done some presentations in Armenia and we are working very closely with them.

The installation is easy for a person who knows how to do it and for a person who is not familiar with this kind of tool it is difficult. However, generally, it is okay for me because I have worked with a DBA before.

The solution is expensive.

I would advise others this is a stable and scalable product, which you need to use in case you have, for example, huge data. If you would like to have more transactions and a secure platform, this is a good choice.

I rate Oracle Database an eight out of ten.

We primarily use the solution for data storage.

Oracle is one of the strongest solutions on the market.

The user experience and the tools provided with Oracle are great. For example, there's the SQL developer, and these tools are really easy and user-friendly. You get used to it very fast. 

The initial setup is straightforward. 

The solution scales well.

We have found the solution to be quite stable.

Technical support is great.

The solution has a high cost. Due to this, people are going for open-source instead. 

If you want to scale, it will get even more expensive.

I've been using the solution for ten years or so. It's been a decade or so. 

The stability of the solution is good. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It's reliable. 

The scalability potential depends on the package that a company gets. If you purchase Datadog, it will be easy to extend and have multiple nodes. The more features you purchase, however, the higher the price. Scaling comes at a cost.

Technical support has been very helpful. They respond on time and you don't waste any time waiting for the tickets. You just get the answer directly usually in the same hour or on the same day at a maximum. We are extremely satisfied with them.

The initial setup is not overly complex or difficult. It's very straightforward.

The cost is very high. All the customers that I know are planning to move to an open-source database for this reason.

I'm just a customer and an end-user.

We used to use 12C, however, we recently moved to 19C.

I would recommend the solution if the company has a budget and if you have a project that will provide revenue to cover the price for the actual product. If a company is going to start a product that will not give the right revenue at the beginning, I would suggest PostgreSQL.

I would rate the product at an eight out of ten. It loses a  few points mostly due to the high price tag.

We have started using it recently, and I don't have any use cases as of now. We are just taking the data from Oracle Database and pushing it to the further layers. We are using its latest version.

It is user-friendly. Its performance and security are also very good. There are 300 million records for our one-year data, and we can easily query this data.

You can use Oracle Database as a source for easily integrating with different databases and applications. It supports Java platforms and other applications very well. It works with SAP products better than Microsoft SQL Server.

It should have more monitoring features. There should be features to be able to analyze the performance with a query. In Microsoft SQL Server, when you are running any stored procedure, if you want to analyze the performance, you just run the query analyzer. You can easily find out that something is missing in a joint condition, or clustering needs to be added because of a delay. I can't find such features in Oracle Database. They should be added.

I have been using Oracle Database for the past three months.

It is stable.

It is scalable. Currently, about 30 people are using it. We don't have any plans to increase its usage.

We have never interacted with them. We are just taking the data from Oracle Database and pushing it to the further layers. We don't find any issues over there, and technical support isn't needed as such.

It was pre-installed. We were given virtual machines for our team, and we are able to just access it through them. We get the user id and password, and we just install that ODBC driver and easily connect to it.

We don't have any rights to install such solutions. We just raise a request for installation. We don't have any authority to install or configure anything. For its deployment and maintenance, there is no need for a technical team because it is pre-installed, and we just use it. No support is required for this, and there is no need for a technical team.

It was purchased by our client. It might have been a one-time payment. It doesn't seem to be very expensive.

I would recommend this solution. Everything is good in Oracle Database. It is very good performance-wise, and that's the reason most people prefer Oracle Database.

I would rate Oracle Database a nine out of ten.

Once we get the installation done, we migrate items to our new DB and we maintain the service with tasks such as clearing the caches and taking the backups, and checking the logs. We look at what it's doing - if something's wrong or if there are any kinds of issues. Occasionally, we do some performance tuning.

The latest version is a lot more organized than the previous version. We can check out the regular files and our dictionaries and our created files, which are a little better organized right now.

The initial setup was pretty simple.

The solution is pretty stable.

The previous version was a little clunky. 

I'm not exactly experienced in troubleshooting. There are issues that I can't really fix. Sometimes I'm helpless with Google also. Trying to learn to identify the exact issue I was getting a Boolean error. I need to improve my knowledge. I'd like to have more documentation or assistance in this area.

The solution could be more user-friendly,

I've been using the solution for five or six years. It's been a while.

It's a wonderful product. Those that have a lot of experience working with the product, those with ten or 15 years of experience, will be able to understand its core processes. Those with only a few year's experience will feel there's a certain lack of transparency.  That said, I haven't had any issues with bugs or glitches, and when it is set up correctly, it doesn't crash or freeze.

The initial setup is not complex or difficult. It's straightforward and pretty easy to set up.

If you are experienced it is an easy task for you, however, it is a process. We have to check every step. If we've done something wrong in any step, then the whole installation process will be for nothing. New errors will come up. We have to document everything and we have to have the requirements clearly laid out. I've learned the hard way that you cannot take shortcuts.

We're just a customer and an end-user. We don't have a business relationship with Oracle.

We have our primary DB on Oracle 19C.

We have to manage everything, including the frontend and backend.

I'd rate the solution at an eight out of ten. If it was more user-friendly, I would rate it higher.

I would recommend Oracle Database to others. We have some colleagues who are doing some small-scale businesses. For them, it might not be suitable. Not everyone should get into Oracle. It is a standard product, however, you need to understand your exact requirements. 

Over the past seven years, we have done many projects, and in many of those projects, we have used Oracle as a source. We are using an ETL tool from Informatica, and we have used Oracle as a source for our projects. For our configuration and repository databases, we normally use SQL Server. We are not using Oracle Database for that.

As compared to SQL Server, Oracle Database performs better when you have a huge amount of data. We didn't face any problems when we had a huge amount of data. There were also no issues with importing/exporting and migrating the data.

We faced some difficulties in the network configuration area. All these things can be fixed with the support of Oracle's networking team. We didn't face any other major problems.

Its deployment can be easier. It should be easier to configure for a developer. If a developer is planning a database and trying to configure it, it should be easy for him because many times, we cannot directly get help from DBAs.

It is stable.

It is scalable. Around 40 to 50 customers are using Oracle Database.

Their technical support is fine.

Until version 11g, I didn't face any problem. You can completely set it up in about two hours. I tried version 12c installation once, and it was slightly different than earlier versions. Oracle Database has worked well from version 8 to version 11. These versions have the same type of things, but I faced some difficulty with version 12c, but that could be because we are not used to it. I need to go through it properly. 

I would recommend this solution to others if they are very particular about formatted and structured data.

I would rate Oracle Database a nine out of ten.

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.

Most recent involvement was the migration of a large database from a non-relational legacy database requiring redundancy with aggressive recovery time objectives (RTO) and recovery point objectives (RPO) for the disaster recovery (DR) environment. We also had a requirement to have the migration completed and the data validated within a single long weekend. 

Significant assistance in tuning both the migration process and the production database was provided by Oracle Consulting Services, which provided excellent and very professional advice.

Switching to Oracle significantly increased stability of the application, and enabled ongoing growth of the application's data. It also provided better insight and diagnostics when data problems were encountered by the application.

RAC clustering allowed us to improve performance and provided additional redundancy. In general, the enterprise-grade features of Oracle are second to none.

In the case noted above, the converted legacy data was stored as XML. The 11gR2 version we converted to stored it as a Character Large OBject (CLOB). The next version of Oracle has a native XML data type, which provides better support for indexing the XML data.

Because of the way the application used the database, we found that two data servers increased performance, but a third one decreased it. This was a limitation based on the way the legacy application configured and used their data and how they did their own locking, which made their lock table a hotspot for the clustering, among other issues.

There was a bit of a learning experience on how to escalate an issue, but once we got through that, the vendor support was really very good.

The previous solution was a non-relational multi-valued database called jBASE.  The database size was exceeding the application vendor's recommended maximum for that database, but their application had the ability to use a number of relational databases with their enterprise features as an alternate data store allowing continued growth.

Initial setup was complex because of the odd way the application used the database, the application vendor's conversion tools, and our stringent requirements.

Implementation was done by a combination of the vendor, the application vendor, and in-house. The vendor teams were exceptionally good.

The ability to continue growing and increased stability were our non-negotiable points.

Be prepared to pay for consulting services, and do not underestimate the time required to find and hire good quality database administrators. Also, carefully evaluate your sizing and performance requirements, involving if you can, both the application vendor and Oracle consultants.

In addition to Oracle, we evaluated SQL Server and DB2.

Do a couple dry runs do thorough testing to ensure that everything will work as expected.

The flash drive recovery feature is the most valuable aspect of ODB for us. There have been many instances when a user mistakenly deletes important files from their flash drive and ODB has been able to recover that data.

The biggest area of improvement that I can suggest is with the stability. I've been using ODB for a while now, and there are have been occasional instances of bugs, glitches, and hiccups. It's never anything major, but they have been annoying. Yes, it's improved over time, but there always seems to be something that has to be fixed.

We haven't had any issues with deployment.

It hasn't been 100% stable, but I think over time it has become more stable than previously.

It has scalability. We haven't had any issues with being unable to scale it.

In our experience, the level of technical support has been in the middle. There are times when they're really good, and there are times when we've had to solve issues ourselves.

We didn't use a previous solution. It's always been our database product.

Although I don't do setups anymore myself, I found it very easy and straightforward.

We didn't look at other options. It was the first database solution we used.

It has evolved pretty well generally. There are consistently new features and Oracle is making ODB more useful.