No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Actian Ingres vs VMware Tanzu Data Solutions comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 18, 2024

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

Actian Ingres
Ranking in Relational Databases Tools
26th
Ranking in Data Warehouse
17th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.9
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
VMware Tanzu Data Solutions
Ranking in Relational Databases Tools
12th
Ranking in Data Warehouse
6th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
89
Ranking in other categories
Database Development and Management (5th), Message Queue (MQ) Software (4th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2026, in the Data Warehouse category, the mindshare of Actian Ingres is 2.5%, up from 1.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of VMware Tanzu Data Solutions is 5.0%, up from 3.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Data Warehouse Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
VMware Tanzu Data Solutions5.0%
Actian Ingres2.5%
Other92.5%
Data Warehouse
 

Featured Reviews

GH
Sr Sales Engineer at a tech vendor with 10,001+ employees
Reliable performance enhances operations with good technical support
We run the entire IRS system, the income system, and the tax system. We also manage the entire Absa banking system in Africa. There's a lot of database applications, similar to those used in banks and the IRS The most valuable features for us are reliability and performance. Our system is used…
Karthik Shivaram - PeerSpot reviewer
Sr. Manager at STI INFOTECH PVT LTD
Improved multi-cloud data management has simplified operations and supports seamless Kubernetes
From my perspective, the biggest challenge with VMware right now is the pricing. To be very honest, in many cases I find myself recommending alternative solutions instead of VMware. Even if those alternatives come with a bit more complexity, customers are often more willing to accept that than the current VMware pricing model. In the past, VMware used a socket-based licensing model, which was easier for customers to understand and budget for. Now the shift to a core-based licensing model has significantly increased costs for many environments, especially for organizations running modern high-core CPUs. One positive aspect of the new model is that VMware has bundled several components together. For example, earlier when deploying vSphere, customers also had to purchase vCenter separately for management. Now multiple components are packaged into a single SKU, which simplifies some aspects of procurement and deployment. While this consolidation has its benefits, the overall licensing and commercial costs remain very high. Pricing is not the only issue. I believe Broadcom also needs to reconsider its strategy in light of the current market conditions. The approach they are taking may be strategic from a business perspective, but from what I see in the field, it is leading to lost opportunities. Many customers who previously relied on VMware are now actively exploring alternative virtualization platforms. I’m not sure where this direction will ultimately lead, but based on my experience, it is already affecting adoption. Since you’ve been trying to reach me for some time—and we also had a discussion a couple of years ago—I hope this feedback helps Broadcom understand the current sentiment in the market and potentially make adjustments. Another important concern is the way features are bundled. In many cases, customers only need basic virtualization and high availability capabilities. However, the current packaging often includes additional features that they may not need. A good analogy is that if a customer only needs an entry-level car, we shouldn’t be forced to sell them a Rolls-Royce. VMware could benefit from adopting a more modular or à la carte licensing model, where customers can choose only the components they truly require. For example, if a customer only needs core virtualization functionality, they should be able to purchase just that. This would allow partners and solution providers to better align solutions with customer requirements and position VMware more competitively in the market. Another challenge I want to highlight is the pricing model based on U.S. dollars and the way multi-year licensing is handled. In many enterprise and government projects, customers prefer to commit to three-year or five-year licenses and pay the full amount upfront. However, in approximately 20% of the deals I work on, we lose opportunities because VMware only provides dollar-based pricing for the first year. When it comes to the following years, the contract requires renewals annually rather than allowing a fixed multi-year upfront payment. This approach is particularly problematic for government and public sector customers. Many of them are ready and willing to pay for three or five years in advance, but the current VMware model does not support that structure effectively. Because pricing is tied to the U.S. dollar and subject to yearly adjustments, VMware does not lock in pricing for the full term. From a customer’s perspective, this introduces uncertainty and makes procurement more complicated. Ideally, if a price is quoted—for example, $100 per year—it should remain consistent across a multi-year agreement. Customers would be comfortable committing to a five-year term if the price were fixed and predictable. Unfortunately, that flexibility is currently not available across VMware products, whether it is vSphere, VMware Tanzu solutions, or other offerings. For large enterprise environments, one-year commitments are usually not practical. Many enterprise customers prefer longer-term agreements for budgeting and procurement reasons. Even when they are willing to accept the higher cost associated with the core-based licensing model, the lack of a clear multi-year upfront option often becomes a deal-breaker.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"Ingres is the only database solution that has maintained a level of consistency and integrity about the way users interact with it."
"The most valuable features for us are reliability and performance."
"The deployment of our solution across a number of servers using Ingres .NET has meant that we can protect the database server behind a highly secure firewall and deploy the front end solutions on a normal web server."
"The most valuable feature of RabbitMQ is the ability to set up workflows simply with configuration."
"In summary, this is a good product that I will continue to use, and I recommend it."
"This product is fantastic."
"Some of the most valuable features are publish and subscribe, fanout, and queues."
"The most valuable feature is it’s robustness."
"Strong integration with Greenplum Servers."
"The solution's technical support is good."
"The parallel load features mean that Greenplum is capable of high-volume data loading in parallel to all of the cluster segments, which is really valuable."
 

Cons

"The ability to reset the log file without stopping the DBMS would be helpful for us."
"The seamless integration is a bit of an issue."
"Initial setup is a little complex. It took around two weeks to deploy."
"The debugging capabilities and testing flexibilities need to be improved."
"Tanzu Greenplum's compression for GPText could be made more efficient."
"It doesn't work as efficiently as we'd like because it requires more segment node capacity (size, RAM, CPU) than we currently have."
"The availability could be better."
"You cannot expect a split second response."
"Have more features such as being able to replay a sequence of what was received."
"they need to interact more with customers. They need to explain the features, especially when there are new releases of Greenplum. I know just from information I've found that it has other features, it can be used to for analytics, for integration with Big Data, Hadoop. They need to focus on this part with the customer."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"Pricing is good compared to other products. It's fine."
"The pricing for RabbitMQ is reasonable. It is worth the cost."
"It is an open-source platform. Although, we have to pay for additional features."
"The product is available for free use since it is an open-source technology."
"The price is pretty good."
"The solution's pricing is cost-effective as it does not involve significant expenses. Licensing is required only for the server, while clients do not need any licensing. Therefore, it proves to be a cost-efficient option."
"The pricing is okay."
"are using the open-source version, which can be used free of cost."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Data Warehouse solutions are best for your needs.
908,834 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Comms Service Provider
12%
Construction Company
12%
Computer Software Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Construction Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Outsourcing Company
13%
Manufacturing Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business32
Midsize Enterprise11
Large Enterprise52
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with Actian Ingres?
The seamless integration is a bit of an issue. I would like to see more direct connectors and stuff like SQLAlchemy. It's there but isn't available as a standard, so it involves going to GitHub to ...
What is your primary use case for Actian Ingres?
We run the entire IRS system, the income system, and the tax system. We also manage the entire Absa banking system in Africa. There's a lot of database applications, similar to those used in banks ...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Actian Ingres?
Initially, it's a lot less expensive than competitors. Price performance has always been a priority, ensuring we remain competitive in the market.
How does IBM MQ compare with VMware RabbitMQ?
IBM MQ has a great reputation behind it, and this solution is very robust with great stability. It is easy to use, simple to configure and integrates well with our enterprise ecosystem and protocol...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for VMware Tanzu GemFire?
My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing for VMware Tanzu Data Solutions is that it is a bit expensive.
What needs improvement with VMware Tanzu GemFire?
In terms of weak points in VMware Tanzu Data Solutions, pricing is always the root cause of people not wanting to renew licenses or do any upgrades.
 

Also Known As

Ingres, Ingres 2006
Greenplum, Pivotal Greenplum, VMware RabbitMQ, VMware Tanzu GemFire, VMware Postgres
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Groupe Adeo, IsCool Entertainment
General Electric, Conversant, China CITIC Bank, Aridhia, Purdue University
Find out what your peers are saying about Actian Ingres vs. VMware Tanzu Data Solutions and other solutions. Updated: August 2026.
908,834 professionals have used our research since 2012.