Oracle Database In-Memory vs Teradata comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary
 

Categories and Ranking

Oracle Database In-Memory
Ranking in Relational Databases Tools
8th
Average Rating
8.8
Number of Reviews
27
Ranking in other categories
Embedded Database (2nd)
Teradata
Ranking in Relational Databases Tools
7th
Average Rating
8.2
Number of Reviews
56
Ranking in other categories
Data Warehouse (3rd)
 

Market share comparison

As of June 2024, in the Relational Databases Tools category, the market share of Oracle Database In-Memory is 0.8% and it increased by 11.4% compared to the previous year. The market share of Teradata is 5.9% and it increased by 10.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Relational Databases Tools
Unique Categories:
Embedded Database
38.9%
Data Warehouse
15.6%
 

Featured Reviews

PS
Dec 14, 2022
User friendly with great scalability but needs to move toward intelligent AI
Our company uses the solution to create relational databases. We use both public and private clouds.  The solution has a simplicity that makes it very easy to use.  The scalability is very good.  The solution should move to the new way of writing software code with AI that is intelligent and…
SurjitChoudhury - PeerSpot reviewer
Feb 20, 2024
Offers seamless integration capabilities and performance optimization features, including extensive indexing and advanced tuning capabilities
We created and constructed the warehouse. We used multiple loading processes like MultiLoad, FastLoad, and Teradata Pump. But those are loading processes, and Teradata is a powerful tool because if we consider older technologies, its architecture with nodes, virtual processes, and nodes is a unique concept. Later, other technologies like Informatica also adopted the concept of nodes from Informatica PowerCenter version 7.x. Previously, it was a client-server architecture, but later, it changed to the nodes concept. Like, we can have the database available 24/7, 365 days. If one node fails, other nodes can take care of it. Informatica adopted all those concepts when it changed its architecture. Even Oracle databases have since adapted their architecture to them. However, this particular Teradata company initially started with its own different type of architecture, which major companies later adopted. It has grown now, but initially, whatever query we sent it would be mapped into a particular component. After that, it goes to the virtual processor and down to the disk, where the actual physical data is loaded. So, in between, there's a map, which acts like a data dictionary. It also holds information about each piece of data, where it's loaded, and on which particular virtual processor or node the data resides. Because Teradata comes with a four-node architecture, or however many nodes we choose, the cost is determined by that initially. So, what type of data does each and every node hold? It's a shared-no architecture. So, whatever task is given to a virtual processor it will be processed. If there's a failure, then it will be taken care of by another virtual processor. Moreover, this solution has impacted the query time and data performance. In Teradata, there's a lot of joining, partitioning, and indexing of records. There are primary and secondary indexes, hash indexing, and other indexing processes. To improve query performance, we first analyze the query and tune it. If a join needs a secondary index, which plays a major role in filtering records, we might reconstruct that particular table with the secondary index. This tuning involves partitioning and indexing. We use these tools and technologies to fine-tune performance. When it comes to integration, tools like Informatica seamlessly connect with Teradata. We ensure the Teradata database is configured correctly in Informatica, including the proper hostname and properties for the load process. We didn't find any major complexity or issues with integration. But, these technologies are quite old now. With newer big data technologies, we've worked with a four-layer architecture, pulling data from Hadoop Lake to Teradata. We configure Teradata with the appropriate hostname and credentials, and use BTEQ queries to load data. Previously, we converted the data warehouse to a CLD model as per Teradata's standardized procedures, moving from an ETL to an EMT process. This allowed us to perform gap analysis on missing entities based on the model and retrieve them from the source system again. We found Teradata integration straightforward and compatible with other tools.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The most valuable aspects of this solution are the fast caching and improved performance to the database"
"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."
"Security is the most valuable feature."
"The most valuable feature is that Database-In-Memory is more consistent and faster than traditional databases as it requires fewer CPUs to process instructions."
"The product offers high scalability."
"The scalability is very good."
"It efficiently handles low-code data and supports read-and-write operations for clustering."
"The solution's ROI is excellent."
"The initial setup was straightforward."
"It's a pre-configured appliance that requires very little in terms of setting-up."
"It has reduced a lot of reworking on maintaining indexes, partitions, etc."
"A conventional and easily defined way to build a data warehouse or a layer of data marts."
"I've never had any issues with scalability."
"I like this solution's ease of design and the fact that its performance is quite good. It is stable as well."
"The solution scales well on the cloud."
"Their extensive experience in data warehousing, the platform's performance, and their strong reputation in the market are the most valuable."
 

Cons

"The high cost of the product is an area of concern where improvements are required."
"It would be good if Oracle could reduce downtime when transferring from non-In-Memory to In-Memory."
"The pricing could be improved. It would ideal if it was more reasonable."
"We often have to find solutions on our own through the support site, so there's room for improvement in this regard."
"The solution should move to the new way of writing software code with AI that is intelligent and learns."
"The solution is quite expensive."
"The product could be more economical."
"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."
"Azure Synapse SQL has evolved from a solely dedicated support tool to a data lake. It can store data from multiple systems, not just traditional database management systems. On the other hand, Teradata has limitations in loading flat files or unstructured data directly into its warehouse. In Azure Synapse SQL, we can implement machine learning using Python scripts. Additionally, Azure Synapse SQL offers advanced analytical capabilities compared to Teradata. Teradata is also expensive."
"Teradata should focus on functionality for building predictive models because, in that regard, it can definitely improve."
"I'm not sure about the unstructured data management capabilities. It could be improved."
"The solution could improve by having a cloud version or a cloud component. We have to use other solutions, such as Amazon AWS, Microsoft Azure, or Snowflake for the cloud."
"I would like to see an improved Knowledge Base on the web."
"Data ingestion is done via external utilities and not by the query language itself. It would be more convenient to have that functionality within its SQL dialect."
"The user interface needs to be improved."
"The scalability could be better. The on-premises solution is always more complicated to scale."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The solution's pricing is high."
"Database In-Memory is priced a bit higher than its competitors like Microsoft."
"The pricing is pretty good so I rate it an eight out of ten."
"The product is expensive."
"It's quite costly and it comes with a fixed price."
"I rate the pricing a zero out of ten because Database In-Memory is too costly."
"There is a need to make a yearly payment towards the licensing costs, after which there is any to pay towards the support cost attached to the solution."
"Oracle Database In-Memory is expensive."
"The solution requires a license."
"We are looking for a more flexible cost model for the next version that we use, whether it be cloud or on-premise."
"The initial cost may seem high, but the TCO is low."
"Price is quite high, so if it is really possible to use other solutions (e.g. you do not have strict requirements for performance and huge data volumes), it might be better to look at alternatives from the RDBMS world."
"Teradata's licensing is on the expensive side."
"Teradata is a very expensive solution."
"Teradata is currently making improvements in this area."
"Teradata is expensive but gives value for money, especially if you don't want to move your data to the cloud."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Relational Databases Tools solutions are best for your needs.
787,226 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Comparison Review

it_user232068 - PeerSpot reviewer
Aug 5, 2015
Netezza vs. Teradata
Original published at https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/should-i-choose-net Two leading Massively Parallel Processing (MPP) architectures for Data Warehousing (DW) are IBM PureData System for Analytics (formerly Netezza) and Teradata. I thought talking about the similarities and differences…
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
20%
Computer Software Company
12%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Government
8%
Financial Services Firm
25%
Computer Software Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Healthcare Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Oracle Database In-Memory?
We can integrate it with any data sources as well.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Oracle Database In-Memory?
The cost of the product is high. There is a need to make a yearly payment towards the licensing costs, after which there is any to pay towards the support cost attached to the solution.
Comparing Teradata and Oracle Database, which product do you think is better and why?
I have spoken to my colleagues about this comparison and in our collective opinion, the reason why some people may declare Teradata better than Oracle is the pricing. Both solutions are quite simi...
Which companies use Teradata and who is it most suitable for?
Before my organization implemented this solution, we researched which big brands were using Teradata, so we knew if it would be compatible with our field. According to the product's site, the comp...
Is Teradata a difficult solution to work with?
Teradata is not a difficult product to work with, especially since they offer you technical support at all levels if you just ask. There are some features that may cause difficulties - for example,...
 

Learn More

 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Shanghai Customs
Netflix
Find out what your peers are saying about Oracle Database In-Memory vs. Teradata and other solutions. Updated: May 2024.
787,226 professionals have used our research since 2012.