Oracle is unaffordable because you don't have enough money. On Mon, Nov 8, 2010 at 11:06 AM, Josh Collier <Josh.Collier@xxxxxxxxxxxx>wrote: > *Sql*server is "nice", but it doesn't have a lot of the fault tolerance > and features of Oracle. * > > > > > > Can you expand on this idea? what fault tolerant features distinguish the > two? > > > > *From:* oracle-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto: > oracle-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] *On Behalf Of *Goulet, Richard > *Sent:* Monday, November 08, 2010 6:51 AM > *To:* RP Khare; oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx > > *Subject:* RE: Why is Oracle unaffordable? > > > > Rohit, > > > > It has been used for that purpose too, matter of fact I don't think > that any current db hasn't been tried as an embedded db at one time or the > other. Some worked well in a particular application some didn't. Depends > on your definition of "works well". Personally I would not use Oracle as an > embedded DB. > > > > On the other hand, what Oracle costs has been debated for a number of > years. Oracle XE is the latest response to that complaint and I think it is > very well received in the market place, like Microsoft SQL*Server CE. As > for having a "high paid" dba around to maintain Oracle, you might get away > without having one, but you should have someone you can call on when Murphy > strikes. Seems we had a similar situation with a SQL*Server install on a > "retired" desktop the other day, expanded the transaction log to the point > where the available space on the disk drive was zero. As the boss says, > anyone can run setup. > > > > > > > > Dick Goulet > Senior Oracle DBA > > > > > ------------------------------ > > *From:* RP Khare [mailto:passionate_programmer@xxxxxxxxxxx] > *Sent:* Monday, November 08, 2010 9:20 AM > *To:* Goulet, Richard; oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx > *Subject:* RE: Why is Oracle unaffordable? > > Dick, > > > What about BerkelyDB? I think it is meant to be an embedded DB? > > ------------------------------ > > Subject: RE: Why is Oracle unaffordable? > Date: Mon, 8 Nov 2010 09:14:09 -0500 > From: Richard.Goulet@xxxxxxxxxxx > To: passionate_programmer@xxxxxxxxxxx; oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx > > Rohit, > > > > There is an old saying that "one gets what one pays for". That goes > for database software as well. Sql*server is "nice", but it doesn't have a > lot of the fault tolerance and features of Oracle. MySql is a toy that got > promoted to something it was never designed for. BerkelyDB is similar, it > was designed for small projects, but then got promoted to larger things. > DB2 and Oracle are "similar" in robustness though feature sets are different > as well as packaging. PostgreSql is somewhere between Oracle and > SQL*Server, though a lot closer to Oracle. > > > > The bottom line is that a db is dependant on what you the developer > want. If your looking for an imbedded DB, then I suggest you try a Google > search, or possibly a visit to your local bookstore. I will agree that as > an embedded db Oracle is a poor choice and there are a number of better ones > out there, but many lack the recoverability, flexibility, and possibly ACID > compliance of Oracle, but then maybe you don't need that. We have one > application designed to reside on a laptop that uses the Java Based Apache > Derby database which is open source. Fits nicely on a 8GB memory stick. > > > > Dick Goulet > Senior Oracle DBA > > > > > ------------------------------ > > *From:* oracle-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto: > oracle-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] *On Behalf Of *RP Khare > *Sent:* Monday, November 08, 2010 4:31 AM > *To:* oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx > *Subject:* Why is Oracle unaffordable? > > Hi, > > I don't want to initiate a religious war. I have been using MySQL since > last two years in production environment. I used SQL Server Express and > Oracle Express before. I have no complaints with either of the databases, > except that Oracle is over expensive and the architecture is unnecessarily > complicated. I want to know whether the complexity of the Oracle > architecture and its ever demanding need for a dedicated DBA is worth paying > or not. If you are an Oracle disciple, I don't want to hurt you and my > views here are totally unbiased. > > I need an embedded database for a shrink-wrapped application. I looked > around for the alternatives. I read about SQL Server CE, SQL Anywhere and > BerkleyDB. I want to try BerkleyDB, but the prices are too high. You could > afford and enterprise class IBM DB2 or Sybase Adaptive Server or SQL Server > with a far lesser amount. > > > Oracle is a good product but it is beyond the reach of customers other than > big giants who pump in too much money just to keep those DBAs happy, who sit > around that black dump command line screen. Why it can't be GUI and simple > and affordable? > > > ............... > Rohit. > > > > > > > > >