Oracle Database Reviews

The majority of the product is E-Business Suite and Oracle Utilities, while the rest is standard, customized product.

Oracle is somewhat user-friendly, and most customization or integration with Oracle-related projects is simple. Oracle will assist you if you have Oracle-related projects in your organization. It will not help you if you are different.

The dashboards are good.

They would not release new updates if products did not require improvement.

Other Oracle competitors charge less and offer very good products that are stable and scalable.

There are good dashboards and other features, but it was previously included in licensing. They are now charging for each and every feature. It was previously bundled.

Oracle Database has been used by the company for over ten years. I've been with Oracle for over 20 years.

The stability of the Oracle Database is good.

Oracle Database is a scalable solution.

Technical support is good, but it is costly.

The initial setup is straightforward. It's easy.

Because it is a bundled product, we have no choice but to purchase the Oracle Database.

Licensing, as well as support fees, are expensive and should be reduced. 

We use Oracle E-Business Suite and Oracle Utilities.

They have advertisements, and since Oracle Databases are used by 60% of the world, they don't need my recommendation; they are already publicizing it.

I would rate Oracle Database a seven out of ten.

Most of our applications are actually generating data on Oracle Database. They're connecting finance, HR, et cetera. Everything is on Oracle Database.

The stability has been very good. Its performance is excellent.

The ease of use has been great.

It's an excellent product. It's a pioneer.

The integration capabilities are very good.

The product is pricey and expensive. 

We've been using this product for well over a decade. We've used it for about 14 or 15 years.

The stability of the product is very good. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It's reliable. 

The product can scale. If a company needs to expand, it can do so.

We have both internal and external users. The amount of users ranges into the thousands. 

We do use support. We actually pay for support and we have used them to assist us during implementation. They have been very helpful.

We have a Microsoft SQL Server as well, however, a different team is working on it. I don't deal with it directly.

While I did not actually implement the solution, I don't see where there would be any problem with the solution. 

We have a technical team of 20 to 30 people who can handle deployment and maintenance. 

We have paid support. When we did an upgrade recently, we got support from Oracle in case there were any issues. They also offer support during installation.

This is quite an expensive product. It's not cheap.

We pay a yearly licensing fee to Oracle. 

I'd rate the solution at a nine out of ten. We've been very pleased with the solution over the years. 

If a company is considering implementing this solution, I would advise that they first look at their requirements. A company should look to see whether they actually need an Oracle Database or not as it's a costly solution. It may be possible that the unique company requirements may be able to be covered via a cheaper database. However, they won't know for sure until they properly do an evaluation.

We use the solutions as a backend, essentially it runs the database. We have the database to support the ERP, which is our customers, and it is running on Java.

The original Oracle Database is good for us, especially because even if the ERP is running on Java, we still get good performances. We are able to tune the database to get more optimal performance out of it. For example, we are storing information on the database and we have not had anybody complaining about lag or degradation, it is really good for our company.

I have experienced good performance from the solution.

Since the solution is from Oracle it tends to be complex when trying to integrate with other solutions.

In a future release, I wish it was easier to run on other cloud services, not just Oracle Cloud. It is possible to run it on other cloud services but it is incredibly difficult to plan and deploy it. However, it is supported by many other cloud services, it is just not easy, but I think maybe that is the direction they are headed.

Additionally, they could make management for security a little more intuitive. It is good so far but it could be easier.

I have been using the solution for four years.

The solution has never crashed. I have never needed to call Oracle to get a support ticket.

We have a really lightweight set up, we have the solution configured for 400 people.

We were using Oracle partner support and they have been very good.

The installation was easy, we had a lot of documentation. We installed the solution on Red Hat Linux and there were sufficient documents informing us on what to expect, hot to install it, and what to set up before you install. The install was seamless.

The deployment did not take long because we installed the solution in our primary location. We did not have to co-locate, the total time was approximately two hours.

The price is a little high for the solution, especially when you try and configure it in certain ways. We are using the application-specific user license, which is a little inexpensive. We pay approximately $4,900 USD annually.

The licensing model is complex, you are charged for many configuration setting used. You could deploy the solution and expect a cheaper rate but you might have deployed the solution with some of the costly features and now have to pay for them.

I rate Oracle Database an eight out of ten.

I support the backend and administration tasks for the databases in my organization, and for our clients, and Oracle is one of the products that I work with. The tasks I perform are things like creating the database and then maintaining it. I do not work with specific use cases but rather, provide support for them.

All of our databases are accessed remotely and are hosted on Linux servers. It is not always easy to manage, considering things like the firewalls that are in place, so we have our own scripts for this.

The cost needs to be reduced because right now, all of our customers are asking us about how they can migrate to any open-source database. This is a very common question and I have been checking our ability to migrate, as well as the tools that we have for doing so, to a product like PostgreSQL.

Oracle is an RDBMS, although most of our customers are now moving towards Big Data. There are open-source databases and you don't need a schema. You can store whatever you want. I would like Oracle to do more for Big Data in the future.

I have been using Oracle Database for more than 12 years.

Oracle is a stable product and we plan to continue implementing it.

This is a scalable solution.

We deal with many database products including Oracle, MySQL, PostgreSQL, and others.

The installation is straightforward. We have both on-premises and cloud-based deployments.

The amount of time required for deployment depends on whether it is a single instance. This time of installation may take 30 minutes. Our installation scripts make it easy to do.

We handle all of the administration tasks including implementation, installation, daily operation, as well as backup and recovery procedures.

In some cases, we have to provide high availability for our customers. Some of them may already have a cluster, so we would implement it. We also provide technical support to them.

We are a team of 10 database administrators.

This is an expensive product.

This is certainly a product that I recommend for large enterprises. However, for smaller companies, we can use an open-source database. That said, if you need something that is highly available and scalable then you have to choose Oracle Database.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

I'm going to be discussing the enhancements to the PL/SQL language in what I'm going to call the bad old days, what we did was we put all of our application code and all of our application objects into one schema. What happened when you would do that is you would have say a SQL injection bug in one piece of code and you could easily point it to very sensitive information. As a matter of fact, I believe Barclay's said 97% of the data leakage is from SQL injection.

Oracle made an enhancement to the language. They added two things that were very powerful. One was the ability to add roles directly to a PL/SQL package. The other thing they added was an accessible by clause such that if I am going to have objects in one schema, instead of granting access to those objects to an entirely other schema such as your app code, I can just grant the access to that object to the program that actually calls it so I could have sensitive objects granted to a sensitive access code. Anybody else tries to get to it, you're not going to be able to get to it.

Then they added one other thing because what you want to do is you want to layer your security. Then they said make it accessible-by. When you accessible-by clause in, the object that is granted access to it, it'll execute, but if anybody else tries to execute that package to get to the object, they're going to get failures. That is what's got me most excited right now about the Oracle language and what they've been working with.

The value is in locking down your data, every time we turn around, we see on TV, GAO got hacked. Somebody's losing their information. You have companies out there going, "We'll protect your private information if you ever lose your information." We shouldn't have to do that. As stewards of this sensitive data, we need to build a security solution around what's sensitive and now Oracle's given us more and more powerful tools in order to implement that.

The biggest benefit is you're closing holes to SQL injection bugs. If I have a program, say program unit A has a PL/SQL injection bug, and you haven't implemented this, if I can inject into A, I can get to the sensitive information. But now by granting the role to the package and also granting accessible by, saying this package is only accessible by this other package, if A tries to get in, it says no, you don't even have rights to execute the code to get to the data.

In the next release, I'd like to see the ability to shred ghost data. I'd like to see the ability to when you run a data pump export of encrypted data and you did not specify encrypted in the command line, the data will be saved unencrypted and it'll spit up an error message, but it's just a warning saying, "otherdata is unencrypted." That does not get into the audit trail. That needs to be in the audit trail so an auditor can later go and say, "Why did we save data unencrypted that's sensitive?"

The stability is fabulous. I have one customer that has scaled this out and the application's now reaching over 100,000 users and we have not had any problems with it.

Oracle's technical support, I use it about once or twice a year. Normally, if I call support, we've got a real problem and they've always been very helpful.

My current customer, it's because a law was passed. This is a new architecture. Similar in terms of the language, but it's enhancements to the language, but what we're doing is building an architecture on top of what the language is now giving us.

It is much easier to set up this solution, designing it in from the beginning because if you try to go back and retrofit your code, it can be done, but it's much more labor intensive. You should always build your security in upfront. Retrofitting code, it's difficult. It can be done because you have to separate your stuff out and sometimes, it may seem like trying to pull the salt out of soup. It depends on just how tightly integrated it is.

Considering the work was already being done in the Oracle and PL/SQL, this was just an enhancement to what we were already doing.

I would give it a 9 because when we first started doing it, we found just little irritating niggles. I wish they had implemented it a little bit different, but overall a 9.

Absolutely do it because if you value your data, you want to be able to secure your data from SQL injection flaws.

Oracle database stores system data accessed by desktop users, primarily for HR and ERP systems. I plan to implement some custom functionalities for standard operations.

Oracle Database is suitable for large enterprises.

Some applications use specialized hardware to optimize query processing. I've received customization requests for call recordings and other features.

I have been using Oracle Database for three years.

The product is stable.

Many team members are using this solution.

The technical support takes longer time to respond.

The initial setup is complex.

I rate the initial setup two out of ten, where one is difficult and ten is easy.

You need an experienced Oracle administrator to maintain the solution.

Overall, I rate the solution a six out of ten.

It is our core for bank processes.

The scalability is very good, and it is stable.

The interface is not reliable because the GUI is old.

It needs to be more attractive.

It is very stable.

The scalability is very good.

We have about 120 users.

It was implemented by a vendor.

We have a yearly license.

For us as a bank, the price is not too high, but for a small business, it would be an expensive solution.

I would rate Oracle Database at nine on a scale from one to ten.

As a database, the solution has been number one from the beginning, in my experience, because of the features and the performance. The solution has a number of Features including , Maximum Availability Architecture for  zero downtime and Zero Data lost.

The only issue is the speed that Oracle is going with the technology transformation. The marketplace is not adapting. As a whole, Oracle innovation is very fast as an organization, but end users are not so much in a hurry to go.

An area that could be improved is information. Everything is going on containerization architecture now. Oracle is also coming up with data Shards with their Multitenancy Architecture to support this containerization. The gap is in marketing the features and the knowledge that the end users are having. The end users must be educated about the current features, and that is what is lacking with Oracle.

Additional features that could be added in the future need Real Time Analytics features and multi-cloud support. But I have seen Oracle is coming up with the Lakehouse and the delta Lake concepts.  Oracle is heading in the right direction, but the features should be communicated to end-users in the proper way.

I've been working with Oracle for over twenty years.

Overall, the technical support is a little bit lacking, and they should improve. Especially the team who is deployed to handle these tickets. Around 50% of the team itself is lacking some knowledge on handling texting and knowledge. They are very good superior resources, that I understand, but in the APEC region, a little bit of lacking. Especially in India and Singapore, because those are not well handled. But in the US, they handle those things.

Positive

I believe Oracle has reduced the pricing.

Every thing starts with a proper foundation , so as with Oracle Database Architecture. Any one with solid architectural foundation will have a life long journey with Oracle Database. 

This knowledge includes conceptual understanding hands-on with scenario and solutions basis which will allow the DBA  to get through with the product. This What I am doing in the trainings that I conduct - https://www.youtube.com/c/tech...

I would give the solution a nine out of ten.