Oracle Coherence is fairly expensive. There are a number of open-source alternatives offering better value for money, provided you need only the basic features of an in-memory data grid. For high-end solutions, involving advanced features, Coherence outstands competitors, fully justifying its price tag.

It is very expensive. It might not work well for small business people.

Was purchased by the organization I worked for.

Price is very high - as for any Oracle product.

Look into the direction of open-source solutions.

Based on my understanding, the license is quite expensive.

The product is the best, but it's absurdly expensive because licensing is according to the number of CPUs. The only advice I can give is to purchase specific hardware with a few CPUs that are as fast as possible, and with a lot of memory.

Due to the licensing prices, we are looking for other solutions as an alternative to Coherence. It is very expensive and projects are not willing to pay this amount of money for caching data, so they requested that we find a cheaper alternative.

My understanding is that Coherence is not cheap, based on Oracle’s Technology Global Price List. However, as a contractor, I did not participate in decision-making related to cost.

The price is high. I believe there should be a cheaper version for only the caching solution.

I am not sure about pricing and licensing, but what I remember from my experience, if a customer has a WebLogic license, it should be ok to use the Coherence cache. But I might be wrong.

Be aware of the pitfalls of using Enterprise Edition in a vast enterprise ecosystem. Specifically, keep in mind the long-term needs of the evolution of your organization’s enterprise infrastructure and susceptibility to change of technology. For example, only GRID edition supports replicated caches, local transactions and different types of clients across tech stacks.

It is costly compared to competitors in the in-memory caching market.

N.A. The client paid a license for the full Oracle stack of products.

The product is considered expensive, hence the company will be on the lookout for a replacement if feasible. I'm not involved in licensing discussion.

Product is too expensive and support is poor. There are better products.