3 ms·
Beside the regular complaints or praises I find oracle extremely ugly, unaesthetic and inconsistent. I understand it is old and has backwards compatibility but
by tartoran 5y ago
Beside the regular complaints or praises I find oracle extremely ugly, unaesthetic and inconsistent. I understand it is old and has backwards compatibility but why would anyone choose oracle over a newer modern RBDMS such as PostgreSQL or MSSQL for a new project? Besides, Oracle is very expensive and very hard to get rid of.
It is also a bit of an issue that they don't have a default IDE, I worked with Rapid SQL which is a clunky, slow and riddled with bugs IDE. I think the Rapid part of its name is pure gaslighting.
- cygned 5y ago> MSSQL T-SQL is just so a weirdly ugly language and the feature set of SQL Server is super weird. If we can, we go with Postgres or MySQL.
- tracker1 5y agoThere are definitely aspects of MSSQL I don't like... for the most part I don't mind it. I will say, if you're willing to pay the cost, getting advanced features setup and running in MSSQL is easier than any other RDBMS I've ever tried. That said, still inclined to use PostgreSQL. I do not like MySQL at all, and every single time I've used it, I feel cringes of absolute pain... starting with "utf8" isn't UTF8, "utf8mb4" is. Or that indexing a binary field isn't case-insensitive (ie, binary) by default.
- tracker1 5y agoisn't case-sensitive/binary... that one got me when migrating data and had converted from older identifiers to a UUID map.
- pas 5y agoThere's Oracle SQL Developer :D but as others mentioned, it's sold to executives, not to technical personnel.
- zip1234 5y agoI actually like SQL Developer, though I haven't used it in quite awhile. Remember it making my life a lot easier though!