We performed a comparison between SAP HANA and Tibero 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."It is a stable solution...It is a scalable solution."
"The data storage requirement is reduced from the original database to the HANA database."
"One feature I find very valuable, is the response time of the application on the database memory."
"It is very stable and very innovative. You can integrate many applications with it."
"The feature that I like the most is that we can transport the data to our web data application. SAP HANA's performance is really perfect. We're working on big data, and SAP HANA is really working on high performance. We are happy working with it."
"The solution offers advanced features that the company was struggling to implement."
"The solution can easily be modeled."
"The main feature is that the processes are very flexible, they are able to be adapted to the business and their departments."
"The most valuable feature is compatibility with the Oracle database."
"Tibero is a relational database management system, which supports disaster recovery, active cluster, active storage, etc."
"Tibero uses Hyper-Threading architecture, which is incredibly fast."
"Tibero is very easy to setup and maintain."
"I would like more technical documentation. I would like it to be easier to find online help or have a better launch-based service. SAP has a lot of functions, so we need more best practices and more detailed documentation on industry solutions. For example, it would be good to have documentation on why a certain process needs to be set up and which kinds of configurations need to be set up."
"While new users to this solution have the benefit of the new design, existing ERP users may experience issues with migrating legacy data. We would like to see development of ready-made tools that allow for easy mapping when upgrading."
"In my limited experience using SAP, the process of granting access to different modules is difficult. Specifically, the requirement to assign roles and key codes to users rather than being able to assign them individually made the process more complex. It would be beneficial if there was a way to assign key codes separately, rather than having to create multiple roles. This would make managing access easier."
"They can improve their technology for the CRM subsystem. There are other products that are better and more effective for the CRM subsystem. Its price could be better. It is expensive."
"The solution is very expensive for us."
"I would like to see improvement on the feedback from the road-map; it is currently extremely hard to get insight in this area."
"The surface side or Attack dashboard needs improvement because there are some gaps after sales services."
"The pricing could be better."
"In PL/SQL code, there is a scope of improvement. We expect more PL/SQL packages should be included in the next release."
"The knowledge base is quite small and should be expanded."
Earn 20 points
SAP HANA is ranked 3rd in Relational Databases Tools with 81 reviews while Tibero is ranked 25th in Relational Databases Tools. SAP HANA is rated 8.4, while Tibero is rated 9.4. The top reviewer of SAP HANA writes "Excellent compatibility between modules and the control". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Tibero writes "A stable and cost-effective tool that is fully compatible with Oracle". SAP HANA is most compared with Oracle Database, SQL Server, MySQL, IBM Db2 Database and Apache Spark, whereas Tibero is most compared with Oracle Database, MySQL, MariaDB, SQL Server and Altibase. See our SAP HANA vs. Tibero 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.