Oracle Database Reviews

Our backend Database is for JDE. Complete enterprise system runs on JDE Oracle Database. But the original, older v9 does support JDE the older platform because all our financial data, as well as sales, revenue and all other data is there, and it's easily accessed.

Everything, because we are the customer for database ... all our applications not only JDE, ERP or some third party applicants APK's also have the backend for Oracle. Because of the flexibility as well as performance wise and as well as data volume, we have huge volume stored. So, other databases cannot provide that kind of flexibility.

Right now, we are very happy. I mean, I don't know what R&D are doing. We are not any looking specifically for anything else. As right now what is available is great.

So far we didn't find any demerits, I mean false reproductions in the database.

So, it's running very well for us.

I've used it for 16 years.

It's very good because Oracle supports very nice and releases some versions and as well as technical support from Oracle itself is very good.

There was no issue with scalability. If you talk about database size it can store high volumes of data.

They are very responsive and as well as knowledgable. If you have any questions or issues, you can search the questions and find the answer yourself, without even talking to a representative. If there is something else they need to know, they call immediately.

It's easy.

There's no other database that supports us like Oracle. My recommendation is, if you are starting a new system for example, I recommend a backend database because it's a universal support. Any applications you can use in the Oracle Database. For example, if you go for iSeries, it supports only db2. Oracle is not like that. It supports SAP, it supports JDE, it supports any. So, it's a universal database.

The most valuable features are it's accessibility and speed for retrieving data that I need, along with the ease of use. That's the most important thing: getting the data out. It’s logical, it makes sense, it’s intuitive.

I'm able to provide analytical data to end users easily, quickly, using a lot of built-in functionalities that the database provides. I don't have to export data to Excel and run a bunch of macros on it in order to get the average column or something like that. The built-ins that they have are helpful.

The biggest area for improvement for me is the error messaging. When it returns errors, it gives you a number; here's why I can't insert a character into a number field. One of the most annoying things for me is that it says, for example, "Value too large to insert column" but it doesn't tell you, "Okay you know what you're trying to do. Tell me what you're trying to do so that I can go fix it a lot easier".

So, more information in the error messaging would be nice.

I've been using Oracle database for more than 30 years.

I love it. I've been progressing with it ever since. It's nice, it does change a lot every year; there are new features. Oracle's always coming out with new stuff and so it's good; keeps you on your toes, keeps you going to OpenWorld.

It is always up. If the database is down, it's more likely something to do with the hardware.

It has scaled well to our needs. We have replication occurring at our office. We use Exadata, and we have clusters. It's replicated across production, dev and two QA instances, so it's nice.

I really don't have much knowledge about technical support because I never have to really do that. If something did go wrong with the database, that'd be more of a database administrator's function.

I was not involved in the initial setup. I'm more of an end user of the database.

I did not look at any other products before choosing Oracle's database.

It's well worth the investment. It might scare you up front because, yes, there are other, less-expensive options out there for your database, but if you plan on building an enterprise application, it's what you have to do. Spend the money.
I love it; it's the best.

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.

The most valuable feature we have found is the multi-tenancy. You can set up background processes and memory at the container level, not at the pluggable level. he second thing is, I can set up a disaster recovery solution for the container database, not at the pluggable level, so that if I have more pluggable databases, I do not need to worry about disaster recovery setup at the pluggable database level. I only have to set it up one time at the containment level. I can reduce my time, effort, cost, everything. I feel this is one of the best features in 12c, multi-tenancy.

Another valuable feature Oracle has released is the Flex ASM in RAC. In 10g and 11c, if something goes wrong for you with A, some instance, your database will go down. But in 12c, if something goes wrong for you with A, some instance, your database will not go down. You automatically use the next two machines, A, some instance. These are two wonderful features that we have used in database 12c.

One more very cool feature is called Information Lifecycle Management, ILM. It is one of the best features right now.

Instead of maintaining multiple servers, multiple databases, multiple disaster recovery solution setups for several levels, if you implement the 12c multi-tenancy, I only have to set it up for one container, not for all of the pluggable databases. I can reduce my support, my time, my effort, my cost, my server cost.

Upgrades.

We have been using 12c for 10 months.

We have been using it for the past 10 months. We have not had any stability issues, at all. We updated the PSU patches, just the CPU patches; it's up and running for months.

We haven’t exactly scaled it right now. Once we upgrade the remaining databases, we can go ahead with scaling it.

We raised a couple of SR requests with the Oracle team, and they responded quickly. We have successfully upgraded one database to 12c.

We are really pretty happy. In the coming months, we are going to upgrade three to four databases to 12c. I attended an Oracle OpenWorld conference to get some information about how I can upgrade with nearly zero down time. I was looking for that.

Upgrading it is not easy, because application to application could be different architecture. Before upgrading to 12c, we have to go into QA and development, from us to QA and development. Once that is successful, you can go ahead with production. Until now, out of six databases, we have upgraded to 12c on one platform; it was smooth.

When you upgrade from 11g to 12c, consider your execution plans. Before upgrading, check it out in the QA and development environments. The third thing is, when you go about upgrading from 11g to 12c, plan how many databases you are going to make as pluggable, and how much memory it requires, and what flat file from exactly you are moving to upgrade. These are the three things you have to keep it mind when it comes to upgrading from 11g to 12c.

Although it is smooth coming into production, you have to be careful. Until now, it has been very smooth. We didn't raise any issues, but we have raised a couple of SR requests. Oracle has provided a smooth solution.

The most valuable feature is the database core in general, of course.

A good DB favors a good solution and also a stable one, so less manpower is spent on buggy maintenance.

Let us say that Enterprise Manager (Web admin) is an area with room for improvement. I have seen it stop working many times. They say it is improved in Enterprise Manager 13 (released with DB 12c R2).

I have used it since 1999.

It is almost always a perfect install; some small issues here and there; mostly few small pre-configs to be done right before install.

So far, I have never encountered any stability issues.

We have not seen any scalability issues so far.

I have not given it a perfect rating because of customer service. It has decreased a little bit in the last decade: more time spent (TAR average) on support than before, and more posts (and time) spent to reach a definitive answer.

Technical support is very good; refer to my answer regarding customer service.

We did not previously use a different solution. We have used it until now. We won't switch until Oracle does. :-)

An in-house team has implemented it every time.

"We're not rich enough to buy cheap things." - English proverb.

Sure, I have worked with other DBs: MS SQL Server, MySQL, PostGreSQL, etc. are good examples.

The asset properties feature is the most valuable one since none of the other databases are able to match this particular aspect. This product has the correct way in which asset transactions are being handled.

There is need for improvement in the Oracle support. We get good support only when we have severity in cases and otherwise it's really tough to get. Thus, they need to improve their support for the lower level programs.

For example, for the SRS over the weekend, there is no support available. Sometimes what happens is that these things are not business critical but those are the ones that are driving the business; we have to hold that.

We have not experienced any downtime. It is very stable.

This product scales well. Exadata, which is giving it, is a powerful machine in regards to storage and so on. For a single instance, we need to have good hardware underneath; only then, it can scale. However, it's doing quite well if we have that.

Oracle support is really good. If we have some issues, we open a case and we get good support from them.

You should use it. I would recommend it.

I would also recommend to do some certification programs so as to get the best out of this product and get a detailed exposure of the core issues.

The most valuable feature is the scalability of the database.

I see an increase in efficiency and reduction of man hours. There is faster response time on the queries and better performance on them.

I would like to see improvements with caching. I know there are some technologies within Oracle which could deliver more in-memory caching.

We looked into Microsoft SQL. We didn't like it nor see it as an enterprise-level solution. Oracle has more features in terms of administration.

I would recommend this solution based on the track record, performance, and the support. It's really easy to figure out. I wouldn't think anybody needs any training on it. The basic knowledge of any database should be sufficient.

Container Databases (CDBs) help reduce server sprawl and manage resources in a much better way. It's a feature that consolidates all your application data with Oracle database metadata, still keeping a strict role to manage each of them respectively. With the CDBs, it's become easy to deploy, clone and administer Oracle databases.

Application Continuity simply helps application to be highly available by doing a lot fewer application code changes.

It helped consolidate most of our database servers, and saved annual maintenance costs of up to 23% on physical servers.

Oracle could provide a few extra features as part of the standard offering in their main license.

I have used it for a few years.

It depends on the kind of database solution you are applying, but I have not yet encountered any stability issues.

10/10 MOS Support is actually something you can heavily rely on.

Technical support is 9/10, very proactive and very helpful.

Use licensing with caution, read the fine print. :) ?This is an important point and usually it's not skipped by the companies paying for the license. Nonetheless, Oracle supports your applications and database only if Oracle has certified the ?hardware and software that the companies have used to build and deploy their applications and databases on; which basically means that you have to use industry-standard hardware and software.

It is possible that your hardware is not supported or has been desupported for a specific version of the Oracle product, so just remember to read the fine print before you deploy your applications.

MS SQL Server was also under consideration, but we had more Oracle DBA's to work with and Oracle’s training requirements were also more favorable.