Oracle Database Reviews

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.

• Performance
• Durability
• Security

For a long time I've been working as a performance tuner for Oracle and Java. The tuning of the performance is very important for me.

I want the price to be lowered.

Oracle solutions are the most used, so we don't need to do verification of the product on our own. We can assume that the product's reliability is high enough. Based on Oracle products we are able to run our own developed applications at very high performance levels.

What we do is that based on a certain understanding about the product speck, based on the maximum transaction we can assume for our businesses, we are going to decide the sizing and then we confirm the capability and we decide the threshold. Then after that we do the scale up. Based on the recent cloud environment, I cannot really say that it's easier for us to do the scale up.

The people who used to work in Oracle are responsible for the tentative troubleshooting at the 1st stage. Then if we need more further investigation, then we exchange the technical support contract. Based on that agreement they will provide us with support. Once we purchase the product from the Oracle, then they offer the knowledge. The structure of the knowledge is quite well-shaped.

For colleagues who are in the financial business and are looking into what kind of product they want to use for their databases - I would recommend using the Oracle Database because in terms of the security and in terms of the audit process it's top notch. When it comes to audits, as long as we say we are using Oracle Database, then they give us a certain assurance. They're confident about it.

It's stable, scalable, transportable – all of that combined together; it's a reliable platform; more knowledge base; and more pertinent support.

I think Oracle could provide some more user-friendly, front-end toolsets. Even though it's for techies, that would be nice. I know they have some, but those are all licensed products.

I have been using Oracle Database for 20 years; a long time; since college.

Knock on wood, there hasn’t been any downtime to the point that is noticeable, but we do plan downtime to do stuff; it has seldom choked up on us.

I think it will meet our company’s needs going forward; so far, looking good. 12c has more promise and cloud is the next frontier. Being in healthcare, just being cautious, but I think there are signs they are getting ready to move to the cloud; gradually, not 100%.

Technical support is good. It should be more direct, but now, it's a little indirect. I still rate them high. When I need them, I can demand and they'll respond. Sometimes, the challenge is the time zone. You have to be careful when you're opening a case; how to make sure you have the right people in the right time zone.

This product came in before I joined my current company. I think it was influenced by their ERP system which they brought over in 1998. Lawson recommended running on Oracle.

Setup is straightforward, but it requires some knowledge. Otherwise, it will turn out to be complex. It's not like anyone can do it. You have to know what you're doing. That involves training and knowledge transfer.

Everything is good but pricing-wise, it's still struggling with that. It's very difficult to justify their costs sometimes in the board room.

We also use SQL Server, MySQL, and a little bit of MongoDB.

I would recommend the products I have experience with. I don't just say yes or no, or give just one or two options; I give you a bit more. I recommend the product I have, Oracle RDBMS Suite. I think they're still trustworthy, if not more.

When I select working with a vendor like Oracle, I look for the sum of their accomplishments. I don't really go for companies because they have been in business for 50 years. I also look for agility; what they bring; transparency; the offering, of course; what they're bringing in and the ideas behind it. Is it going to be sustainable for five years or more? Is it going to diversify itself across the industry? I rate thsee factors high.

Of course, it has been around forever, so the scalability of Database is, in my experience, the most valuable feature. The fact that there's so many applications written for it is great. We've seen others who have used other databases, but they don't have nearly the suite of applications and APIs to work with as RDBMS has.

It is such a mature product with the ability to handle many things. The newer version, 12c, has some features that people have been asking for. It was the same way going from 10 to 11 to 12, as they always seem to be listening to the customers and adding in some more features that they need.

With Oracle, the complexity of Database makes it a little bit more cumbersome. You're going to generally have more of a senior DBA to handle the intricacies when you get a large, very high, and intensive database that needs to be up all the time. You have to have a little bit more expertise in there.

We've had no issues deploying it, but, again, it requires expert administration from a more senior DBA.

Usually, you don't see any stability issues, but that really depends on the level of expertise of the DBA handling it.

There are no scalability issues, so long as the DBA is experienced.

The more expertise you have, the more the interfaces and UI become straightforward and easier to use in the initial setup.

If you look at the price point with it and how they structure the licensing, it is definitely going to be one of the more expensive ones. You do get everything with it because they throw everything in with the kitchen sink. If they could pare down the solution, then you could just choose the pieces that you want and maybe pricing might be a little bit more along the lines of what customers could use. It is definitely on the more expensive side.

In terms of scalability, make sure it's going to be what you need. Know exactly what purpose you're going to be using your database for. I'm one of the few people who knows a lot of different kinds of databases and which is best for what you want to do.