4 ms·

Many large companies want a Batphone to call someone for support. They think that the vendor will magically just make things work. Normally that’s not the case.

Many large companies want a Batphone to call someone for support. They think that the vendor will magically just make things work. Normally that’s not the case. They might get it to work faster than your people, but probably not much quicker. FOSS often has a Batphone, but few people pay for it. As a result management doesn’t want their Ops to be the only possible team to correct things.

zaphar 3y ago
You can get a Batphone without doing business with Oracle. Microsoft SQL Server will give you a Batphone and would still be better than doing business with Oracle.
- seniorThrowaway 3y ago
  I don't know if it is still the case but MS SQL was very deficient tech wise against Oracle DB, and never really a contender for a large OLTP DB. To the point that for some applications, it simply would not work due to excessive locking.
  - zaphar 3y ago
    I've used MS SQL recently and it holds up more than fine if you tune it properly. Oracle also needs tuning properly so that's not big deal.
seniorThrowaway 3y ago
support contracts are mitigations to management career problems, not to technology problems. Managers always want that throat to choke to deflect blame or buy time
JoshuaRogers 3y ago
Absolutely. I’m surprised that the belief in much of the comments is that the technical input of developers (like myself) affects whether Oracle gets consideration. Oracle gets consideration because teams want to have a lifeline if something goes wrong or (worst case) someone else to pin the blame on when it does. And this happens because some businesses are actually so big that that level of comfort doesn’t even dent the budget. Oracle actually has some nice parts and some rough edges (a statement that applies equally to PG and SQL Server too, for instance), but it comes with a king-sized security blanket.
- zaphar 3y ago
  What is weird is that there are many good technical reasons to use Oracle. It's a very advanced and impressive database. The risks from doing business with Oracle are nearly all legal and business cost related. The sort of thing that are squarely under the supposed expertise of the non developer folks. My objections against Oracle are not technical in nature. It is almost entirely cost and legal risk related.

zaphar 3y ago

You can get a Batphone without doing business with Oracle. Microsoft SQL Server will give you a Batphone and would still be better than doing business with Oracle.

seniorThrowaway 3y ago
I don't know if it is still the case but MS SQL was very deficient tech wise against Oracle DB, and never really a contender for a large OLTP DB. To the point that for some applications, it simply would not work due to excessive locking.
- zaphar 3y ago
  I've used MS SQL recently and it holds up more than fine if you tune it properly. Oracle also needs tuning properly so that's not big deal.

seniorThrowaway 3y ago

support contracts are mitigations to management career problems, not to technology problems. Managers always want that throat to choke to deflect blame or buy time

JoshuaRogers 3y ago

Absolutely. I’m surprised that the belief in much of the comments is that the technical input of developers (like myself) affects whether Oracle gets consideration. Oracle gets consideration because teams want to have a lifeline if something goes wrong or (worst case) someone else to pin the blame on when it does. And this happens because some businesses are actually so big that that level of comfort doesn’t even dent the budget. Oracle actually has some nice parts and some rough edges (a statement that applies equally to PG and SQL Server too, for instance), but it comes with a king-sized security blanket.

zaphar 3y ago
What is weird is that there are many good technical reasons to use Oracle. It's a very advanced and impressive database. The risks from doing business with Oracle are nearly all legal and business cost related. The sort of thing that are squarely under the supposed expertise of the non developer folks. My objections against Oracle are not technical in nature. It is almost entirely cost and legal risk related.