# What do you think about Oracle Database?



## graudeejs (Oct 16, 2010)

What do you think about Oracle 10g, 11g database?

I'm studying Oracle database for university.
Professor recommended to install 10g (less bloat)

I installed 10g on Legal Windows XP in VirtualBox
So now after trying to work with it for some 3 days... my impression isn't all that good...

For most part I use Web interfase... because I don't like SQLpluss in command prompt.... (psql [PostgreSQL client] in terminal is MUCH, MUCH better)
I got nuts, when I can't do some stuff, that I would expect like loading 1.2MB data file in table)


I'm used to PosrgreSQL & Unix like os.

I just hate that Oracle 10g doesn't have boolean data type (ok, I can live without it, but it's annoying)
I find it stupid, that 10g doesn't have serial data type (like in PostgreSQL)

Of course there are some things that 10g can and PostgreSQL can't.

I wanted to know what do you think about it 

P.S.
Now installing Debian in VirtualBox to try 10g on Linux (failed to install on Ubuntu)
I hope it will be much better experiance


----------



## da1 (Oct 16, 2010)

Not much of a db guy myself but I know oracle pays nice for good technicians. The guys at work claim it runs really nice on RedHat so maybe you could give that one a try too.

On the other hand, theres a pretty nice "fight" (at work) between oracle and db2 guys. Seems to me db2 is a bit more out there (of course, talking about high levels) and as far as I've heard, it performs better ? (?)

98% of our clients use Oracle V11; maybe it's worth studying too smurf.


----------



## vermaden (Oct 17, 2010)

I have been on two Oracle trainings (11g Administration Workshop I & II) and I am not impressed that much, typical enterprise (or should I say enterPRICE) software, lot of bloat in the installation (so called binaries), there are some nice features but I havent seen anything that would rip the helmet off the head.

... same for IBM TSM (Tivoli Storage Manager) if You ask.

Both of these things are rather complicated and require a lot of time to administrate them at good level (I still need to learn a lot to do that).


----------



## da1 (Oct 17, 2010)

vermaden said:
			
		

> ... same for IBM TSM (Tivoli Storage Manager) if You ask.
> 
> Both of these things are rather complicated and require a lot of time to administrate them at good level (I still need to learn a lot to do that).



True for TSM ).

My question would be, of course, what are you planning on doing with the knowledge. Like I said, Oracle pays off nice. If you're just curious yeah, nice thing to study but I don't think anything compares if you are not doing it @ high levels (= high $).

It's all about the benjamins. TSM/Oracle/db2 ... same $#|+.


----------



## oliverh (Oct 18, 2010)

If it fits the job, it's the best "tool" you can get including the support. And the latter is premium in my opinion. Most of the time we're happy with the usual stuff like PostgreSQL etc., but there is work, that's  a home match for Oracle in terms of performance and scalability. It's similar to the ongoing BSD Vs Linux Vs Solaris debate, there is a place for Linux and *BSD and there is just enough room to fit something like Solaris. In the usual heterogeneous environment, there is no room for any kind of "fanboyism".


----------



## dennylin93 (Oct 18, 2010)

killasmurf86 said:
			
		

> Of course there are some things that 10g can and PostgreSQL can't.



I've been wondering what Oracle has over PostgreSQL. Can someone enlighten me ?

I've also been thinking about ditching MySQL and adopting PostgreSQL.


----------



## vermaden (Oct 18, 2010)

dennylin93 said:
			
		

> I've been wondering what Oracle has over PostgreSQL. Can someone enlighten me ?



Check Oracle RAC and Oracle DataGuard for example, I do not follow latest PostgreSQL so maybe it has such things.



			
				dennylin93 said:
			
		

> I've also been thinking about ditching MySQL and adopting PostgreSQL.


Do it, its always good idea to switch to real database


----------



## graudeejs (Oct 18, 2010)

dennylin93 said:
			
		

> I've been wondering what Oracle has over PostgreSQL. Can someone enlighten me ?
> 
> I've also been thinking about ditching MySQL and adopting PostgreSQL.



PostgreSQL

```
Maximum Database Size	Unlimited
Maximum Table Size	32 TB
Maximum Row Size	1.6 TB
Maximum Field Size	1 GB
Maximum Rows per Table	Unlimited
Maximum Columns per Table	250 - 1600 depending on column types
Maximum Indexes per Table	Unlimited
```
http://www.postgresql.org/about/


Oracle 10g - Max DB can be 128TB
http://download.oracle.com/docs/cd/B19306_01/server.102/b14237/limits002.htm

Also:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_relational_database_management_systems#Limits

Well 32GB is way more that I ever will need


----------



## anomie (Oct 18, 2010)

killasmurf86 said:
			
		

> What do you think about Oracle 10g, 11g database?



[ side note: I work in a Linux + Oracle shop ]

I think it's a mammoth, proprietary, resource-hungry DB with a bizarre maze of inconsistent documentation. It's also used by many heavy hitters, so clearly Larry figured out the equation - at least for making money. 

Lest this be perceived as a negative Oracle rant, I will say that I'm very fond of their OCFS2 filesystem.


----------



## rden (Oct 19, 2010)

anomie said:
			
		

> I think it's a mammoth, proprietary, resource-hungry DB with a bizarre maze of inconsistent documentation. It's also used by many heavy hitters, so clearly Larry figured out the equation - at least for making money.



It's the same path that works so well for Microsoft.

They can now move to either optimising the bloat ("improved speed etc") and when that reaches it's its limit replacing it with new incompatible "enhanced" replacement bloat - keeping the loop going forever.

(A-la win 2k-> XP -> Vista -> 7 - basically the same shyte re-wrapped every few years as something completely new - including the high performance/server ofshoots which are also all the same shyte with some kiddy/idiot bloat turned off to make it "professional".  Truth is the only thing that kept this train alive for MS is the constant availability of improving hardware.)


----------



## DutchDaemon (Oct 19, 2010)

It's always refreshing to see someone turning a non-Microsoft thread into a Microsoft one. But it's not happening.


----------



## qsecofr (Oct 19, 2010)

I'd stick with what the professor recommends and use Oracle (either version) if at all possible.

Our shop has Oracle & DB2.  My experience with Oracle is limited.  I like updates and merges using joined tables, and really hate flex-fields.  Apart from that I personally prefer DB2 more generally.


----------



## mix_room (Oct 20, 2010)

In my opinon you should learn SQL, and not learn a particular dialect of it. 

Learn about the language in general, and then learn the dialects, which is essentially what MySQL, PostgreSQL and Oracle etc etc are. 

If you were learning english, what should you learn first? 'Common English', American, British, Jamaican, Australian, Indian or some other dialect?


----------



## vermaden (Oct 20, 2010)

mix_room said:
			
		

> In my opinon you should learn SQL, and not learn a particular dialect of it.
> 
> Learn about the language in general, and then learn the dialects, which is essentially what MySQL, PostgreSQL and Oracle etc etc are.
> 
> If you were learning english, what should you learn first? 'Common English', American, British, Jamaican, Australian, Indian or some other dialect?



That depends if You need to use SQL queries to get data into your applications or if You are 'just' a system administrator which must know how to install/configure/tune/backup/restore/clone each database


----------



## graudeejs (Oct 20, 2010)

mix_room said:
			
		

> In my opinon you should learn SQL, and not learn a particular dialect of it.
> 
> Learn about the language in general, and then learn the dialects, which is essentially what MySQL, PostgreSQL and Oracle etc etc are.
> 
> If you were learning english, what should you learn first? 'Common English', American, British, Jamaican, Australian, Indian or some other dialect?



That's not what this topic is about...


----------



## achix (Oct 22, 2010)

vermaden said:
			
		

> Check Oracle RAC and Oracle DataGuard for example, I do not follow latest PostgreSQL so maybe it has such things.
> 
> 
> Do it, its always good idea to switch to real database



PostgreSQL 9.x has two new features, someone must be blind to miss!

- Hot standby (with either WAL shipping or streaming replication)
- Streaming Replication

A hot standby is a machine who replays the WAL shipped by the master DB, and is open for read-only statements.
Streaming replication is the new way of sending the records of WAL over to the slaves, ensuring that in case of a disaster the lag could be even as small as one single xaction.

Regarding clustering, Enterprisedb was offering PostgreSQL commercial solutions, but now the scenery is about to change with the 9.x. Most offerings most probably will adapt to these new features.


----------



## vermaden (Oct 22, 2010)

achix said:
			
		

> - Hot standby (with either WAL shipping or streaming replication)
> - Streaming Replication



These two should work the same as DataGuard, RAC is active/active Oracle cluster, so the HOT standby would work as active/passive I suppose (which is also nice cosidering its free).


----------

