Oracle Exadata is an enterprise database platform that runs Oracle Database workloads of any scale and criticality with high performance, availability, and security. Exadata’s scale-out design employs optimizations that let transaction processing, analytics, machine learning, and mixed workloads run faster. Consolidating diverse Oracle Database workloads on Exadata platforms in enterprise data centers, Oracle Cloud Infrastructure (OCI), and multicloud environments helps organizations increase…
$2.90
Per Unit
Microsoft SQL Server
Score 8.6 out of 10
N/A
Microsoft SQL Server is a relational database.
$1,418
Per License
Pricing
Oracle Exadata
Microsoft SQL Server
Editions & Modules
Database Server
$2.9032
Per Unit
Quarter Rack
$14.5162
Per Unit
Subscription
$1,418.00
Per License
Enterprise
$13,748.00
Per License
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Oracle Exadata
Microsoft SQL Server
Free Trial
No
No
Free/Freemium Version
No
No
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
No
No
Entry-level Setup Fee
No setup fee
No setup fee
Additional Details
—
—
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Oracle Exadata
Microsoft SQL Server
Considered Both Products
Oracle Exadata
Verified User
Anonymous
Chose Oracle Exadata
I couldn’t find all the options listed here, so I’m
summarizing the ones we considered during our evaluation before selecting
Oracle Exadata Service on AWS:
A unique architecture of Oracle Exadata machine which consists of several components: compute, storage cells with offloaded SQL processing within the cell, smart cache. In addition it is an Oracle RAC server with high speed interconnect between its built-in nodes.
Oracle Database Exadata Cloud Service allocates built-in cloud automation and enhances enterprise-class business continuity by enhancing zero downtime maintenance which is contrary to other alternatives such as Apache Hive.
Vice President, Chief Architect, Development Manager and Software Engineer
Chose Oracle Exadata
Oracle Exadata Database Machine had the best performance overall hands down. It clearly beat the competition and we were seeing 1000X improvement on SAP HANA. Oracle Exadata Database Machine beat that without us refactoring our code. To achieve that in HANA, we had to …
IBM POWER System is a general purpose hardware optimize to runs various software with high-performance resource intensive operations. On the other hand, Oracle Exadata Database Machine is specifically engineered to run Oracle Database software efficiently, this combination of …
IBM AIX and HP-UX implementations of Oracle database solutions have a lot of performance issues. Both do not provide as much robust configuration customization as Exadata. Hardware support is limited. There is generally a long delay between hardware update being certified with …
We have done a proof of concept for both and have seen a lift with our batch processing and all other aspects with Oracle Exadata. Oracle Exadata storage servers have been playing a key role with the overall success compared to other products.
We selected it just from a performance perspective, and that the ROI with the Oracle Exadata Database Machine is bigger than other machines. You can run with it for at least 5 years.
I do not think there is any alternative for Exadata. Flash storage or SSD can not solve the IO bottleneck issues the way Exadata handles the IO subsystem.
Exadata beats the competition because the smart scan and offloading technology is more about software than hardware, so you cannot just buy a beefy server and add flash disks to compete. The Exadata software is what makes it special.
You could consider i did use Mysql since i worked with some websites that were using a mysql database. I could not give a side by side comparision since i don't use those like i use the Microsoft SQL , but so far it worked well. I prefer Microsoft SQL due to support and info …
UI of the Microsoft SQL Server makes it easy to use and learn. The better technical support and documentation give it an extra edge over other databases. The Microsoft ecosystem provides additional advantages, as we can seamlessly use other Microsoft products, such as Power …
Microsoft SQL Server is faster and more compatible, but it does cost more, so you're paying for those features. I use the others in many other places where critical transaction processing time and compatibility aren't of great concern.
Microsoft SQL is slower than MySQL and Access but far more feature-rich and reliable. Access is almost obsolete nowadays, so not too many people are considering it, but unless budget or an open-source ethos is a factor, Microsoft SQL is superior in every way. Many commonly used …
Microsoft SQL Server providers a more user friendly experience when it comes to Microsoft SQL Server components management via its unique SQL Server management Studio. It is also a production ready, resilient, highly available and tested database management system (DBMS). The …
The first database application taught when I was in school was Microsoft SQL Server. Microsoft SQL Server was used where I first started, so I had the opportunity to improve myself in MySQL. SQL is also used in my current workplace. It is widely used in very large projects due …
We have a few different DB's in the organization, including: Pervasive, Oracle, Db2, MySQL. Many of them are of limited use for one specific application. These don't really compare to MS SQL server. Oracle is heavy and cumbersome and overkill for smaller apps. Pervasive - …
Microsoft SQL Server is a comprehensive solution as transactional database, data warehouse, analytics, reporting, and ETL. It also integrates with the cloud well (Azure). The ease of use and setup makes this better than Oracle Database because the query syntax is also different …
I think both tools are really powerful and close to each other but since I moved to Europe I realized that most of the companies have been using SQL Server which in my opinion means something. The support from Microsoft I also consider a bit better and you can also find more …
Microsoft was the original creator of the SQL database, and thus, they still rule the market and drive innovation when it comes to data warehousing systems. It's comparable in price and allows you to retain the structured datasets that you lose when you change to a NoSQL …
[Microsoft] SQL Server has a much better community and professional support and is overall just a more reliable system with Microsoft behind it. I've used MySQL in the past and SQL Server has just become more comfortable for me and is my go to RDBMS.
Microsoft SQL Server and Oracle are both extremely powerful and scalable enterprise relational database platforms. Microsoft SQL sets itself apart with its ease of use and licensing and support model. Microsoft is good company to work with and they provide clear and …
It just boils down to why learn anther product when you are going to run across it so seldom. Developers determine what database engine I am going to need so I just tend to pick products for implementation that use a well know product that has lots of support resources …
The most known and widely used competitor of Microsoft SQL is most probably the open-source MySQL. If given the choice I would personally choose MySQL over Microsoft's SQL Server, mainly because it is totally free and open source, but also because it integrates better with …
[Microsoft SQL Server] offers a full solution, Inhouse Applications and hosted application continue to use SQL as backend database. Allows easy creation of development environments and continuous feature release.
All of the platforms have their own benefit. I was not the decision maker in selecting Microsoft SQL Server, as it was already being utilized when I joined the company, 7 years ago. I can say that I feel more comfortable with utilizing this platform as opposed to the other ones.
The free version is very powerfull and easy to install and use for small companies. Going to Professional and Standard, gives you all the support and the flexibility needed. It is known within the Database Administrator crew, and you can get support very easily over the …
Native to Windows and being required for other MS apps puts it above others in terms of usage. If we were not heavily dependent on Microsoft applications or OS, we might have considered other database solutions. It's an expensive solutions but it is a solid reliable solution. …
I was not too impressed with Oracle. Following the manual prohibited installation. They did provide a phone number and explained the manual was wrong and provided me with the correct information with which I was able to install the product. This was awhile back and I do not …
Microsoft SQL Server is one of the fastest RDBMS systems available in the market. Pricing is a bit on the higher side but all the features it provides pretty much justifies it. It can be integrated with a large number of frameworks thus enabling to work on multiple frameworks …
Microsoft SQL Server is still the industry standard for the type of development we do, and the types of applications that we use. Almost every developer or analyst we hire has at least a reasonable grounding in the use of SQL servers, and it is almost universally compatible …
First, get the database on Oracle. If you are in an Oracle stack, it would be much better to use the Oracle products. If you are driving a Ferrari, you wouldn’t put a Mercedes engine in it. If you are writing a query, you cannot rely on other brands. Since I'm an architect, when I look for a product, I look for performance.
The installation is easy because it comes out-of-the-box and you just start using it.
Previous to Oracle Exadata, we were using a normal Oracle RAC service. We were just waiting for this product to come out.
I'm currently writing a data warehouse on Exadata. Before this solution, we were aiming for this to be completed by 8 a.m., when our ETLs would finish. With the help of Exadata's special features, this was reduced to 3 a.m. This solution allows us to bring more data within the same time period. It provides us with more subject areas that provide more reports to our users. Our ETL times reduced to 65%, then to 50%.
Microsoft SQL Server is ideal for highly available SQL workloads by using SQL Server Always On availability groups. Microsoft SQL Server might not be appropriate for solutions which require a very low resource footprint, since it requires significant CPU cores and RAM memory as well as high IOPS, always depending on the usage scenario.
Customize-able for specific functionality optimized for combination of online transaction or analytical processing.
Ability to serve mix workloads with resource management feature enables prioritizing allocation for certain workload.
Scale-able on-premise with compatibility for cloud deployment offers flexible solution for organization considering to transition from on-premise solution.
I think it is unlikely that sql server has disappointed someone, it is likely that someone will come initially discouraged if the needs and problems that occur are very challenging, but definitely have a SQL oriented system means having a solid base to work and on which maintain the their data securely
I am comparing Exadata with the Oracle RAC database experience. In addition to Oracle RAC features, Exadata provides automatic performance optimization through Smart Scan and storage indexes. Deep integration with the Oracle ecosystem and tight coupling with Oracle Enterprise Manager for monitoring and management. Some downsides of Exadata are: a steep learning curve, concepts like cell offloading, IORM, and flash cache behavior aren’t intuitive initially. Operating Exadata requires specialized DBA skills.
SQL Server mostly 'just works' or generates error messages to help you sort out the trouble. You can usually count on the product to get the job done and keep an eye on your potential mistakes. Interaction with other Microsoft products makes operating as a Windows user pretty straight forward. Digging through the multitude of dialogs and wizards can be a pain, but the answer is usually there somewhere.
We managed to handle most of our problems by looking into Microsoft's official documentation that has everything explained and almost every function has an example that illustrates in detail how a particular functionality works. Just like PowerShell has the ability to show you an example of how some cmdlet works, that is the case also here, and in my opinion, it is a very good practice and I like it.
Other than SQL taking quite a bit of time to actually install there are no problems with installation. Even on hardware that has good performance SQL can still take close to an hour to install a typical server with management and reporting services.
I couldn’t find all the options listed here, so I’m summarizing the ones we considered during our evaluation before selecting Oracle Exadata Service on AWS:
Continuing to use the Oracle RAC on‑premise database Running Oracle Database on AWS EC2 Using Oracle Database through the AWS RDS service
Since we wanted to retain Oracle RAC capabilities while achieving high performance and maintaining our presence in the AWS public cloud, we selected the Oracle Database @AWS Exadata service.
Microsoft SQL is slower than MySQL and Access but far more feature-rich and reliable. Access is almost obsolete nowadays, so not too many people are considering it, but unless budget or an open-source ethos is a factor, Microsoft SQL is superior in every way. Many commonly used tools, like Crystal Reports, support it.
One of the central critical systems was migrated from a large 4-node Oracle RAC running on legacy hardware. This application was experiencing severe performance issues literally causing loss of service for numerous customers. Once it was migrated to a 2-node Exadata server, its average performance improved almost by a level of magnitude, therefore eliminating any signs of application slowness.
Numerous application databases were migrated to Exadata servers which reduced the overall cost of hardware due to Exadata's price structure.
Increased accuracy - We went from multiple users having different versions of an Excel spreadsheet to a single source of truth for our reporting.
Increased Efficiency - We can now generate reports at any time from a single source rather than multiple users spending their time collating data and generating reports.
Improved Security - Enterprise level security on a dedicated server rather than financial files on multiple laptop hard drives.