Skip to Main Content

Breadcrumb

Question and Answer

Tom Kyte

Thanks for the question, spawn.

Asked: November 10, 2002 - 9:46 pm UTC

Last updated: November 02, 2010 - 6:25 am UTC

Version: 8.1.7

Viewed 1000+ times

You Asked

Hi Tom,

Sorry but this is not really much of a technical question. hope you'd bear with me. Just like to burst out some emotions. he he he. Sometime ago, I had an interview. Not knowing that the company I was applying for did not use Oracle RDBMS. The interviewer was kind to me. ALthough I can see the disbelief in his eyes as he scanned my cv. He said that my experience was really mostly on Oracle products. They were using SQL Server, DB2 and he said SQLBase(dont know what that is). Then, their big boss suddenly came. Curious, he was informed that I was an applicant. He learned that I was an Oracle DBA.(FYI, I learned that he was formerly from IBM). He started to ask me non-technical questions on the spot as if trying to catch me off-guard). He asked me the difference between hierarchical and relational databases. I didn't give it a thought and told him that I didnt know. Then there were questions that were sort of techincal like schema(and of course I know it). But he didnt give me time to answer and just started to underestimate the powers of the oracle database. I was just smiling at him all that time(I said to myself, this man doesn't know the many features of oracle).I knew that Oracle RDBMS was number one so I didn't think that his argument was nonsense. I tried to persuade them that Oracle being number one is true because of the various features it has that is way beyond compare from other databases.

Tom, I am not knowledgeable on other databases and when I do get the chance to defend Oracle again, I would like to be able to say something that would leave my audience(non-oracle believers) tongue-tied. I know the many features of oracle but am not sure if other databases have them. I would like to be able to argue with them in a way that I would be able to convince them that Oracle is better, and that they should use it instead of other databases.(and that they should hire me to help them develop their systems on oracle. he he he). anyway, thanks tom. sorry for this non-technical question. It's just that it was my first time to encounter an oracle antagonist.

and Tom said...

</code> http://asktom.oracle.com/pls/asktom/f?p=100:11:::::P11_QUESTION_ID:1886476148373 <code>

I use that story every time. We all have literally thousands of features. going "tit for tat" will never work.


I would ask them "so, 5 years ago -- 1997 -- were you running large mission critical applications on windows" (this invariably gets a chuckle, "no of course not"). What makes you believe that 5 years from now you will still be? Go back 5 years more, it is 1992 -- Unix was *just starting* to be totally trusted in the data center (at Oracle, it was all about VAX back then). So, if you had choosen a database that was tied to an operating system -- where exactly would you be? (you can ask the fed govt actually -- they bought into this "one hardware", "one os", "one software vendor" thing big time in the early 90s -- do you remember a company called Wang? sold the machine, the OS, the spreadsheets/word processors/database on a system that followed their standards and no one elses. Sound like something you are familar with?)

So, why would you pick a database that locks you into an OS like sqlserver? Even DB2 does this -- if you build an application on DB2/AIX can you put it on DB2/Linux? Maybe but probably not if it is a non-trivial application as their linux port is missing tons of functionality they have on their AIX port (their AIX port has the most features -- all other unixes have bits and pieces of the functionality as they port the bits and pieces). How about moving from DB2 mainframe to DB2 windows -- is that just "export import" and you are running (no, not even close). Ask IBM how many databases (relational and hierarchical and flat file) it took for them to even come close to the market share Oracle has with a single, homogenous product set? I know of something like 7 or 8 RELATIONAL databases and then there is ims, idms, etc etc etc -- all of that lumped together. None of them interoperable to a large degree....



Rating

  (13 ratings)

Is this answer out of date? If it is, please let us know via a Comment

Comments

oracle

mo, November 11, 2002 - 11:34 am UTC

Excellent answer.

Plain and simple "Oracle" is the best DBMS in the world and "Tom" is the best oracle guru on planet

What about pl/sql?

Shrek, November 11, 2002 - 11:44 am UTC

Among the many other things I sorely miss in other databases, one is pl/sql. I have used Sybase, and SQL-Server, there are times you need loops, conditions, and arrays in a program and you need to use (sybase, sql) cursors and temp tables in a convoluted fashion, which are very slow and resource consuming operations, and just not implemented the same as in Oracle. From time to time, I use these other databases, and the one thing I consistently miss is the ease and convenience of pl/sql.

I battle this everyday

Bill, November 11, 2002 - 12:06 pm UTC

Everyday i get this from our developers: why is sql server faster than Oracle, why spend the money on Oracle when it is slower than sql server, why is Oracle so complex i can drop my database in sql server with a right-mouse click, etc etc
The developers point-of-view is based on ONE O/S locked application that was not designed nor implemented correctly. Frequent commits out of transactions and lack of bind variables and thrashing shared pool KILLS our Oracle implementation.
I should get a copy of Toms book for each of them...

can't make a cow dance....

Robert, November 11, 2002 - 3:45 pm UTC

>>I should get a copy of Toms book for each of them...

And you really believe they are going to read past the first chapter ???

Oracle database difference from other databases.

spawn, November 11, 2002 - 6:11 pm UTC

Thanks Tom for the very informative answer. And the link was really helpful. Now I know how to address people who dont believe in the "Powers of Oracle Database". he he he. Next time I encounter one, I'm ready with the knowledge you just shared.

Oracle Technology cannot be compared

Tarry Singh, November 12, 2002 - 9:48 am UTC

The dedicated professionals that oracle has, including tom kyte himself, are the driving force behind oracle technologies.
Oracle has not only been the first to do all that may not need any introduction but also the one where you can derive more from it.
If you want to talk about marketing, I'm gonna tell you, market it the way tom does, [b]show it!!![/b] It's eventually a (amalgam of financial/technical) choice to choose for whatever you want, but by choosing oracle you don't have to worry about [b] the bus stop[/b] like if windos goes bust ,so does sqlserver.





Your views...

A reader, February 25, 2003 - 4:24 am UTC

Hi Tom,
Regarding
"Even DB2 does this -- if you build an application on DB2/AIX can you put it on
DB2/Linux? "
Correct me if I am wrong, I came to know that Oracle is releasing oracle 10i which may support RAC for other Unix platforms of importance. So, If I have an application running on supported unix RAC, how can I say that oracle is same if I want to port to AIX/unix the application(i.e., currently not supported for RAC)?
Thanks

Tom Kyte
February 25, 2003 - 9:46 am UTC

Well, Oracle 9i -- in fact Oracle8i, Oracle8, Oracle7 -- all have supported clusters on AIX for years and years

So, the premise you are coming from 'that rac isn't available' is flawed.

We support RAC on all platforms of consequence today -- already.

Thanks. What about this...

A reader, February 25, 2003 - 3:00 pm UTC

Hi Tom,
Actually, I was referring to the News
from...
</code> http://www.internetweek.com/breakingNews/INW20021115S0002 <code>
"
Oracle 10i To Offer Clustering On Sun, HP, IBM Unix Versions

By Techweb News

Oracle plans to upgrade its database next year with improvements in capacity and clustering, according to reports.

The clustering functionality of Oracle Real Application Clusters, which detects when nodes are failing, will be extended to Unix systems from Sun Microsystems, Hewlett-Packard, and IBM. That functionality is now supported only on Windows and Linux.

Capacity will be improved to the petabyte range, for applications such as data warehousing and life sciences. The current capacity is hundreds of terabytes.

Oracle will also improve the performance and capabilities of XML DB support, which allows the database to act as an XML store.

Oracle is also developing portal technology, called OmniPortlet, for aggregating information from different sources. And the company plans manageability improvements to its database.

The next database version, referred to internally as Oracle 10i, is expected to ship in mid-2003."




Tom Kyte
February 25, 2003 - 8:36 pm UTC

I believe they MIGHT be talking about the cluster FILE SYSTEM.

I believe news reports are written by reporters ;) they don't do databases.


I believe they are confused...

goto
</code> http://technet.oracle.com/documentation/oracle9i.html <code>

you can pick up

Oracle9i Real Application Clusters Real Application Clusters Guard I Configuration Guide for Unix Systems: AIX-Based Systems, Compaq Tru64 UNIX, HP 9000 Series HP-UX, Linux Intel, and Sun Solaris



Thanks a lot!

A reader, February 25, 2003 - 9:24 pm UTC


IBM DB2 Viper

A reader, August 23, 2006 - 6:41 am UTC

See </code> http://www.infoworld.com/article/06/08/14/33FEdb2viperanalyst_1.html?s=feature http://www.infoworld.com/article/06/08/14/33FEdb2viper_1.html?s=feature <code>

"XML information no longer needs to be broken into parts and put in rows and columns; it can be stored as XML. So DB2 expands its reach to be both a relational table manager and an XML manager...Oracle is about a full release away"

Huh? Oracle XML DB, XMLType has been around in 9i since 2001, what are they talking about?

Tom Kyte
August 27, 2006 - 3:29 pm UTC

marketecture.

they have "invented" something they call "native xml" - meaning, they store it sort of external, in yet another data store.

A step backwards if you ask me.

You have for a long time had the ability to

a) store the xml natively, as it was ingested
b) "shred" it into an object relational data store
c) do a hybrid approach where you store it natively and extract elements of interest for relational storage.


and you could index, query, transform, whatever all of the above....

Petabyte Database

A reader, May 27, 2008 - 12:59 pm UTC

http://www.intelligententerprise.com/channels/information_management/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=207801579

In this article, Yahoo claims that "the reason Yahoo developed its database was that commercial database providers just couldn't meet its needs. Hasan said that the commercial vendors did pretty well up to about 25 terabytes, and could even manage up to 100 terabytes. 'Our needs are about 100 times higher than that.'"

What's your view on this? Can Oracle support a petabyte database?

Tom Kyte
May 27, 2008 - 3:22 pm UTC

they do not have a single database - they are massively distributed.

oracle

A reader, November 01, 2010 - 10:59 pm UTC

Tom:

Have you written anything on when you use a spreadsheet application versus database system.
I am trying to answer someone who is claiming he could replace an online transaction system with a bunch of spreadsheets. data model is pretty complex. data is not huge but hundreds of thousands of records.
Tom Kyte
November 02, 2010 - 6:25 am UTC

you could replace a multiuser, scalable, secure, flexible OLTP system with a bunch of spreadsheets (getting of course a single user, not scalable in ANY sense of the word, insecure, darn hard to figure out OLTP (well, it wouldn't really be transaction processing - spreadsheets don't do transactions so we'll just call it OL) system.

But what would be the point? If you only need a single user - buy quickbooks or something.

spreadsheets

A reader, November 07, 2010 - 3:14 pm UTC

IT will never work. They will start with thousands of spreadshseets and will end up with major disasters.

One person sorts one column without the rest, and your production stuff is screwed up.

The best thing is to store data in a DBMS and export to a spreadsheet for reporting or data analysis.

How do you usually provide the *flexibility" required for users since they want to sort data and play with it like a spreadsheet. Most GUIs are not flexible in that regard which makes spreadsheet appealing to users.
more

Connor and Chris don't just spend all day on AskTOM. You can also catch regular content via Connor's blog and Chris's blog. Or if video is more your thing, check out Connor's channel and Chris's channel from their Youtube channels. And of course, keep up to date with AskTOM via the official twitter account.