We performed a comparison between Oracle Database and SQL Server based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: Of the two solutions, a lot of users favor Oracle. However, users are happier with the price of SQL Server.
"You can install Oracle Database software, patching, and create/configure Oracle databases in silent using scripts"
"The best features of Oracle Database Server are the security, high availability, and the Disaster Recovery solutions with the Data Guard. Specifically, on Autonomous Databases, the most valuable features are the automatic scaling and CPU scaling depending on the database workload. Today, the workload is normal and then suddenly the workload gets a spike."
"Stability and availability are the features I like the most in the solution."
"You can scale the solution without any issues."
"The solution is very stable."
"If we make a mistake on the development side, we can recover it. However, we don't have this capability with other databases."
"Scalable and stable database platform. Setting it up was straightforward."
"Significant assistance in tuning both the migration process and the production database was provided by Oracle Consulting Services, which provided excellent and very professional advice."
"Many developers like SQL Server."
"SQL Server Profiler makes finding and debugging easy."
"SQL Server stands out due to its robust parallel processing capabilities."
"The technical support is good."
"I have experience with this product for many years. I never have problems with it. It can handle a PC, and it can also handle huge data. It is fast and efficient."
"The solution is very easy to use. It's intuitive and easy to navigate. Overall, it's a straightforward product."
"The solution is very intuitive and easy to use."
"The product has very good online documentation that can be used for troubleshooting."
"Support is not available when one encounters problems."
"I'm in Indonesia. From what I know, Ali Cloud has already built a center in Indonesia, and Google also has a data center in Indonesia. I have heard that Amazon will also build a data center in Indonesia, and the same will be with Azure if they deal with the Indonesian government. I'm quite appreciative of what Amazon has done by deciding to have a local data center. I expect Oracle to do the same, but Oracle doesn't seem to have plans to build a data center in Indonesia. This is something that needs to be improved. Oracle should follow all the other cloud providers who see a potential market in Indonesia. It would be better for Oracle to be equal to other cloud providers and have a data center in Indonesia so they can compete. Having a local data center means that they can avoid performance issues, the latency of the network, and all the things that are related to the network for internet-based solutions. Customers in Indonesia expect a local data center."
"It would be nice if creating indexes and other small, repetitive tasks could be automated."
"Oracle Database could improve by making migration less difficult and having better integration. For example, having the ability to communicate, using native features, to different databases. Mostly connectivity to different databases, such as open-source databases or any other database."
"Oracle Database has improved how we do our administrative backups. The solution has a smaller footprint than 11g, it's more efficient on the resources for the users. It has a smoother user experience with the ERP and fewer field transactions."
"If you want to scale, it will get even more expensive."
"The solution can be quite expensive."
"While working with 20-30 terabytes is okay using this solution, if you have Big Data, data that's much bigger than that, you will run into issues. It's a problem I have right now. They should support much more data."
"Performance could be better. But I don't know if it's a problem with my application or with my database."
"The performance degrades when the data is huge."
"The scalability is adequate but could improve."
"In terms of what could be improved, everything on-premise is now moving to the cloud. Obviously SQL Server has also moved, because Microsoft Excel has its own cloud called Azure Finance. Every solution comes with its own advantages and disadvantages."
"Sometimes we experience issues with its stability."
"The performance needs some improvement and it needs more features integrated into it."
"The solution could be better when it comes to security."
"The interface integration could be better."
Oracle Database is ranked 2nd in Relational Databases Tools with 283 reviews while SQL Server is ranked 1st in Relational Databases Tools with 260 reviews. Oracle Database is rated 8.6, while SQL Server is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Oracle Database writes "Supports a large volume of transactions compared to other databases". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SQL Server writes "Easy to use and provides good speed and data recovery". Oracle Database is most compared with SAP HANA, MariaDB, IBM Db2 Database, Amazon Aurora and MySQL, whereas SQL Server is most compared with MariaDB, SAP HANA, LocalDB, IBM Db2 Database and Teradata. See our Oracle Database 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.
As always, it depends: First look is the area: on-premise server (your own hardware) or in the cloud?
If you want to use your own server, look at the operating system? In my opinion, SQL Server fits best on Windows; Oracle on Unix/Linux. Next is your size of data and the application you want to use: rule of thumb: the more data, the more I tend to Oracle; but Oracle is not 'automatically better'! You need an expert to configure the system for optimal use! A simple setup is often not enough! (There are a lot of screws you can turn, but turning the wrong ones is a negative! And more Hardware is not the solution to a slow system). I think the first step is to look at which app creates and consume which data, where in your network is your data needed and then decide the RDBMS. I have worked for years in a mixed environment; we use a large Oracle RDBMS on AIX to store the large amount of data of several production systems; but also some SQL Server RDBMS to distribute data for some evaluations or reports. In the Oracle RDBMS are 30 Years of data of the whole production process; in SQL Servers are consolidated data for reporting. So first make a compilation of your existing data and application and the future requirements; then you can decide; and the result can also be a mixed world!