We performed a comparison between Oracle Database In-Memory and SQL Server based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Relational Databases Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The most valuable aspects of this solution are the fast caching and improved performance to the database"
"We can integrate it with any data sources as well."
"The product offers high scalability."
"The on-premise version is stable. We have different teams and resources for the server side, for admin, and for development. We can easily take care of all the services and applications."
"The application development is very user-friendly."
"It efficiently handles low-code data and supports read-and-write operations for clustering."
"Security is the most valuable feature."
"The scalability is very good."
"The installation is pretty straightforward."
"I love the developer version. Microsoft tells you about all the cool things they provided for everybody. You can develop and do anything with it. It's really good to learn. Oracle will not give you that much freedom, and Microsoft really kills it. You don't do anything with it but develop, learn, break, and push it to its limits. If there are problems, you show Microsoft or ask them, "what's going on here?" There is good community support for the developer edition, and that's what I really appreciate. You can teach people about it without limitations. You can have small databases created. You can keep it for a year and then work on it. It's a good thing for learners and developers."
"The most valuable features are ease of use and the integration with Single Sign On (SSO), as well as with other Microsoft products."
"SQL Server stands out due to its robust parallel processing capabilities."
"SQL Server is widely used and it's simple. You cannot do without Microsoft if you want to manage IT for a business customer."
"The installation is really easy."
"I love SQL Server's Common Table Expression. In addition to that, I like its lead and lag functions. That helped us reduce a lot of code when comparing rows in SQL Server."
"The pricing of the product is very good."
"Oracle Database In-Memory appliance-based solutions can be restrictive for some applications, as they may require more flexibility in the database design to be tuned and sized to the customer's needs."
"The platform’s pricing needs improvement."
"Technical support is below our expectations currently. It could be improved."
"They should improve the solution's scalability for large databases."
"The solution is quite expensive."
"Lacks sufficient integration with other tools."
"The high cost of the product is an area of concern where improvements are required."
"The solution should move to the new way of writing software code with AI that is intelligent and learns."
"Something that could be improved is the cost because it's very high. That's the only thing I'm concerned about but the technology is good."
"The documentation could be much better. It's lacking right now. If there are better help pages, for even complicated queries and stuff like that that would be quite a help for users."
"The product overall would benefit from the addition of better tutorials to help master the skills necessary to actually build a project database. Right now, what is available isn't sufficient."
"There should be more tools and documentation for tuning the performance of Microsoft SQL Server. It would be nice to have more tools for tuning because currently, all the tuning that we have to do with our databases is almost manual. We have to read a bunch of knowledge base articles, and this information should be better documented. Its free text search should also be improved. It is quite important for us. Currently, we're developing our own free text search because of the lacking flexibility in Microsoft SQL Server. Therefore, we're kind of using elastic search and making different implementations in order to reach our targets. Using just the native free text search of Microsoft SQL Server is not enough for us. It should have more flexible features as compared to the current version."
"The pricing of the product could be better."
"Their support could be better. There should be more visibility on the progress of the ticket, and their last line of support should be more knowledgeable. Other than that, we have nothing to complain about."
"On the SQL Server Management Studio (SSMS) side, I have noticed more bugs in terms of being able to connect to our SQL servers. I can't tell how many times my recent server list got dropped or cleaned out. It is a pain, and it would be nice to have that recent connect list when you connect in. For whatever reason, once in a while, I get a hard error, and it'll close. When I go back in, everything is cleared out. It is annoying when you are working with more than a hundred database instances."
"Microsoft support is an issue unto itself."
Oracle Database In-Memory is ranked 8th in Relational Databases Tools with 27 reviews while SQL Server is ranked 1st in Relational Databases Tools with 260 reviews. Oracle Database In-Memory is rated 8.8, while SQL Server is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Oracle Database In-Memory writes "User friendly with great scalability but needs to move toward intelligent AI". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SQL Server writes "Easy to use and provides good speed and data recovery". Oracle Database In-Memory is most compared with SAP HANA, IBM Db2 Database, Progress OpenEdge RDBMS, Apache Derby and kdb+, whereas SQL Server is most compared with MariaDB, SAP HANA, Oracle Database, LocalDB and IBM Db2 Database. See our Oracle Database In-Memory vs. SQL Server report.
See our list of best Relational Databases Tools vendors.
We monitor all Relational Databases Tools reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.