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 scalability is very good."
"The scalability of the solution is very good. It's able to support large amounts of data."
"Normally, every database server uses hard disks. In-Memory has a feature, apart from their database, which is very good. When we start our server, all your data needs loading memory. We can use that. It's a very good feature. I think they added this feature in 2019. We can mount memory in the partition, create partitions in there, and create table space from that spot to share. It's a really good feature. We use it a lot."
"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."
"It accelerates query processing, which in turn speeds up operations and streamlines workflow, and ultimately enhancing productivity."
"It efficiently handles low-code data and supports read-and-write operations for clustering."
"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."
"We use the tool for real-time data transfer for risk management purposes. In a trading system, conversions happen fast. We use the product to handle fast transactions with low latency."
"The technical support that Microsoft provides is great."
"We have found the solution valuable because we are able to easily create a query, shrink, backup, and make new tables."
"It is easy to use and very stable."
"I value the ability it gives me to test on small machines and easily scale up to larger devices for live applications."
"SQL Server is an inexpensive solution. I recommend it if the project isn't sensitive. SQL is similar to Oracle and integrates well with tools in the cloud environment. The difference is that Oracle is for data solutions where there is replication and moderation."
"A big advantage is the ability to store any type of data in SQL Server."
"The solution is easy to use."
"The management studio is probably the thing we use the most for running quick queries and creating quick reports. Quite often, somebody comes and says, "Hey, can you find XYZ?" It is so much easier just to jump in there and run a quick query."
"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."
"We use some partitions in In-Memory. We have a very large table and a low dose. It is very expensive in data to load all of them into In-Memory. It takes up more memory slots in the server, as well as a lot of RAM. We use last partitions on the table. We always need to create a script and make a schedule that can load a last partition in In-Memory. Oracle doesn't have features to do this automatically. I would like them to allow us to load last partitions, as well as other table partitions, in In-Memory. I think a good feature would do that automatically, letting you see a table, load a large partition, and monitor loading memory. It's quite a good feature."
"The solution should move to the new way of writing software code with AI that is intelligent and learns."
"It would be good if Oracle could reduce downtime when transferring from non-In-Memory to In-Memory."
"The high cost of the product is an area of concern where improvements are required."
"The platform’s pricing needs improvement."
"The solution is quite expensive."
"The product could be more economical."
"Support could be improved."
"The backup capacity needs to be bigger."
"The price could be better. It costs a lot, and competing databases like Postgres are free."
"We experience latency at times when there is a lot of data being processed."
"SQL Server could improve the integration with nonrational database solutions, such as MongoDB."
"I would like to have the ability to restore backups in the next release."
"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."
"Since this is a relational order system, scalability has a limit. If your system is very big, you need bigger servers and you have to spend more money. We scale a system up to a certain level, and then we move or shift data to the warehouse, which is NoSQL. We then do not have any bottleneck in scaling. For using this technique we are happy with it."
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, Progress OpenEdge RDBMS, IBM Db2 Database, MariaDB 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.
