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

Oracle Coherence vs VMware Tanzu Data Solutions comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jan 23, 2025

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

Oracle Coherence
Ranking in Database Development and Management
10th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
5.8
Number of Reviews
31
Ranking in other categories
In-Memory Data Store Services (4th)
VMware Tanzu Data Solutions
Ranking in Database Development and Management
6th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
89
Ranking in other categories
Relational Databases Tools (14th), Data Warehouse (4th), Message Queue (MQ) Software (5th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2026, in the Database Development and Management category, the mindshare of Oracle Coherence is 3.8%, up from 1.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of VMware Tanzu Data Solutions is 2.9%, up from 2.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Database Development and Management Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
VMware Tanzu Data Solutions2.9%
Oracle Coherence3.8%
Other93.3%
Database Development and Management
 

Featured Reviews

SS
Data Engineer at a financial services firm with 10,001+ employees
Facilitating real-time business insights with enhanced data querying
Coherence is beneficial due to its multi-indexing to the same object and filtering based on data attributes within the object, followed by aggregation. These features facilitate querying data with multiple keys rather than just a single key. Its real-time data processing capabilities provide insights for business decisions with up-to-date information.
Karthik Shivaram - PeerSpot reviewer
Technical Director 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

"We are storing information from one of our applications; this allows us to answer requests in milliseconds, while the application would take seconds to answer requests from clients."
"High availability, distributed calculation features, and WebLogic integration are the most valuable features to me."
"I have used Oracle Coherence for more than 10 years, from version 3.5 through 12.1.2.1."
"A single logical cache scattered across various geographies ensured we had only one cache to look against (location transparency) at the same time, ensuring high availability."
"It was suited for stock exchange marketing software, improved performance."
"A robust standalone caching solution that prioritized speed of data serialization and data integrity was a must, and Coherence delivered on that front."
"Basically reducing response times to extremely small latencies in their apps."
"Coherence absolutely outperforms others in terms of scalability, reliability, and performance."
"Batch processing times have dramatically decreased from over 12 hours to under three hours."
"The most valuable feature of RabbitMQ is the ability to set up workflows simply with configuration."
"It's one of the fastest databases in the market. It's easy to use. From a maintenance perspective it's a good product. The segmentation, or architecture of the product is different than other databases such as Oracle. So even in 10 years, the data distribution for such segments will not affect other segments. The query performance of the product, for complex queries, is very good. It has good integration with Hadoop."
"The most valuable feature for us is horizontal scaling."
"The message routing is the most valuable feature. It is effective and flexible."
"It's a very good product for reducing the time and man power needed for database optimization for datawarehousing purposes."
"This has helped us bring down our end-to-end EDW load time to one-third the time and has enabled faster and efficient data analysis in a scalable environment without adding too much cost."
"The service and support we’ve received from both Pivotal and EMC has been exemplary."
 

Cons

"Initial setup was complex. We wrote a lot of wrapper code around the Coherence libraries in order to make it easier for the developer."
"Reloading really takes a lot of time."
"It is very easy to set up a basic topology, but hard to configure and tune to make it really work."
"We have encountered the occasional minor bug and very occasional more serious bug."
"I would like to see a more modern API like Hazelcast or Infinispan."
"They could make the configuration management easier."
"The initial setup is complex and time-consuming."
"Monitoring API needs to be improved and needs to be user friendly. Also, the error and exception handling is not that great as it can be difficult to debug issues."
"Have more features such as being able to replay a sequence of what was received."
"If you have a user consuming a huge load of resources, it takes down the entire system."
"Other tools besides RabbitMQ provide good TPS and HA."
"We would like to see Greenplum maintain a closer relationship with and parity to features implemented in PostgreSQL."
"ORCA optimizer when turned on is not showing consistency. Some workloads shows improved performance and some workloads became very slow."
"The availability could be better."
"VMware Tanzu Data Solutions is already a strong platform, but it could be improved with better support for a wider range of databases and data services for more flexibility."
"I'd like so see better scaling, better performance from in-memory databases, and a higher compression rate."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"The product is available for free use since it is an open-source technology."
"Tanzu Greenplum's pricing is really competitive and gives excellent value for money."
"It’s an open-source solution."
"It is the best product with best fit for price/performance customer objectives."
"It is an open-source product."
"The pricing for RabbitMQ is reasonable. It is worth the cost."
"The pricing is okay."
"On a scale of one to five, with five being the most competitive pricing, I would rate this solution as a four."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Database Development and Management solutions are best for your needs.
920,769 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
21%
Outsourcing Company
13%
Comms Service Provider
7%
Construction Company
5%
Outsourcing Company
16%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Construction Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business5
Midsize Enterprise3
Large Enterprise23
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business32
Midsize Enterprise11
Large Enterprise52
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with Oracle Coherence?
The WebLogic Management is quite cumbersome. The initial setup is complex and time-consuming.
What is your primary use case for Oracle Coherence?
I utilize Coherence for data solutions in the financial industry. Its primary use case includes plain lookup, indexing, filtering, and aggregation.
What advice do you have for others considering Oracle Coherence?
I recommend Coherence, as I don't have any product issues. The main concerns are high pricing and a complex initial setup. Overall, I would rate Coherence as an eight out of ten.
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

Coherence
Greenplum, Pivotal Greenplum, VMware RabbitMQ, VMware Tanzu GemFire, VMware Postgres
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Industrial Bank of Korea, Hotelbeds, Canon Inc., Verizon, Securitas Direct Espa_a, S.A.U., CetelemEspa_aGrupo BNP Paribas, Telus
General Electric, Conversant, China CITIC Bank, Aridhia, Purdue University
Find out what your peers are saying about Oracle Coherence vs. VMware Tanzu Data Solutions and other solutions. Updated: November 2026.
920,769 professionals have used our research since 2012.