Slashdot Mirror
Oracle Named Database of the Year, MongoDB Comes In Second (softpedia.com)
An anonymous reader writes: Oracle's database management system has seen the biggest rise in terms of popularity in the past year. Oracle didn't only see a rise in the number of deployed instances, job offerings and mentions on LinkedIn profiles, but for the first time also became a popular topic on Twitter and a constant mention on StackOverflow, a popular Q&A support forum for developers. Second on DB-Engine's popularity list was MongoDB, which barely missed winning the DBMS of the Year award for the third time in a row.
Because writing to nev/dul is PERFORMENT!!!!!
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
So the biggest increase in popularity is the only factor? If someone makes a new DB that increases 10000% in users, does it win? Because you'd only need 100 users to accomplish that.
:..elect the only relevant nosql db, plus the SQL db everyone hates so much that nosql almost seems worth trying by comparison.
In b4 web scale
Sorry, but with silly results like this, I have to ask why such a small article so vapid of meaningful content was posted on Slashdot. Shouldn't paid shill articles be a different color or something?
No mention was given as to how this ranking was accomplished, and the list given at the bottom of the article doesn't even match the headline (where 2 and 3 are MySQL and MS SQL Server, and Microsoft Access beats Cassandra.
Any DB ranking that puts Access in as a top contender should definitely back up their claims - extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence!
I have no problem with your religion until you decide it's reason to deprive others of the truth.
MongoDB comes in 1st Place as the leakiest and most compromised of 2015. They'd like to thank the Academy, and all of the companies who laid off their DBAs and sysadmins in favor of hiring a barely-over-minimum-wage "full stack developer" to do it all. Schadenfreude is beautiful.
I really tried to love MongoDB but I realized that all the freedom they claimed was freedom to structure things exactly there way and only their way. I now hate MongoDB like it is leaking sewage pipe at an Ebola hospital.
I used oracle professionally for about 8 years until I realized that things like PL/SQL didn't exist to help me structure an N-Tier system better but to just lock me into their stupid database. Oracle as a database isn't terrible so much as their pricing, and even worse, their sales people are horror shows. Pretty much if I can't install my datastore using apt-get or yum then it isn't getting installed.
I would say the only thing worse than having to deal with either of the two above poxes upon humanity would be the people who evangelize these solutions. Someday they will realize the MongoDB isn't NoSQL but HUMONGOSql. Or that PL/SQL was just a huge joke designed to waste many billions of developer's hours while making them pay for the privilage.
Until then we will just continue to use our secret MariaDB and PostgreSQL handshakes and we will just smile as the Oracle and Mongo people keep struggling in the mire not knowing that there is a great jogging path a few feet away.
Larry really needs to buy another Hawaiian island, so just in time.
Website Just Down For Me? Find out
What is this, an unpaid advertisement?!
Everyone knows Oracle sues its customers into using all kinds of software they don't WANT or NEED.
You don't win a popularity contest by being a bully.
These number indicate AGONY, not POPULARITY.
Oracle 12g now supports multiple databases on the same server instance! Amazing breakthrough in database science, coming just a few years after their latest innovation: case insensitive LIKE.
Of course multiple databases per server instance has been available in SQL Server since the time it was still Sybase and in MySQL since before Y2K. But those are not Enteprise Worthy Databases of course so it doesn't count, and the fact that on SQL Server there's no additional expensive license to enable this feature is all the evidence we need. ORACLE RULES!
lucm, indeed.
Oh, don't worry, they'll take a pledge for your first born, and if you fail to deliver they will come and rape your wife/girlfriend/significant other then send you a bill for their time.
No wonder people talk about them...
Until this year, Oracle didn't lightly use the "nuclear option" breach notice, Guarente says.
"We’ve seen an uptick in aggressive audits and breach notices," he says. "I started this company in late 2011. From that moment until February, I saw no breach notices. Zero. Now we’ve seen several this year."
http://www.businessinsider.com...
Also the new licensing rules for using Oracle in non-OracleVM virtual machines are disgusting.
lucm, indeed.
At least tag articles or something if they're going to be clickbait, misleading, non-news stories.
Also, your description is wrong; from the methodology page (for the "study", http://db-engines.com/en/ranki...), the metric doesn't measure deployed instances, or usage, or even active interest. The metric measures delta in mentions online related to the DB type. The only valid conclusion you can draw is that there was a larger increase of mentions of Oracle than other databases.
I could suggest one compelling alternative explanation for the findings: the world is becoming more concerned about computer security, and since Oracle is one of the companies who's products are the most plagued with security problems (and the Oracle brand is intentionally associated with Java in all regards), that could easily explain an increase in mentions of their company. Just a thought, you know, for people who think.
I'm not real sure what one idiot they polled to get these results, with the fanboys of nosql these days, I can see MongoDB ... but Oracle? Bullshit. You lose all credibility right there.
Just the other day, Slashdot told us that Oracle Java was the top programming language, so this is par for course.
I can only presume that Slashdot has been sponsored by an ophthalmologist chain, because this hard eye rolling will have repercussions.
Next week: Slashdot tells us that Oracle Linux is the leading OS.
if popularity mattered, i would run Windows. what's popular is rarely good. how else do you explain beiber?
Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
First Java and now Oracle? Hmmm, I wonder how that happened.
ayottesoftware.com
So you're comparing Oracle to Sodom and Gomorrah? That's apt.
No, Oracle is rpm. It's Debian (or is it just Deb now?) that's apt.
And Sodom and Gomorrah produced salt, which has its uses...
The link you give is to a counter for how many times someone searches Google / Bing for the Database, or uses a FREE service to talk about the product. This is so obviously flawed I don't know where to begin. Lets start with: Running MySQL, my mode of support is Google and my postings about my cool tools and handy hacks will be in Stack Overflow. Running Oracle, my mode of support is Oracle as I have no reason to search for help in Bing or Google. Further, my epeen waving will be on Oracle's forums, not stack overflow. That's enough to not bother with the other BS used to "measure" popularity. If you don't see immediately how the results from the site you posted are going to be grossly skewed, I can only suggest a good strong lobotomy.
I originally came here to ask "Is it sharded?" as a joke.. .thanks for wrecking that for me.
-The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.
Given how vilified Oracle is especially for it's licensing practices, which were discussed here: http://developers.slashdot.org... I'd think people who can would be migrating away in droves and voting it down rather than database of the year.
"Mongo only pawn in game of life."
Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
There's a new provision for shared VM storage.
Let's say you have a SAN volume attached to 10 ESX boxes (basically a VMWare Datastore). Even if you only have 1 VM running Oracle and it's deployed only on one of the 10 ESX machines in a non-vMotion architecture, you have to license all the CPUs of all the machines that use that SAN volume. Even if you have non-hypervisors using that LUN you have to license them.
They essentially make it so expensive to use VMWare that you have to switch to OracleVM or get back to physical boxes. Or buy their fucking cloud license.
And the nightmare doesn't stop there. Let's say you give up and decide to dump your VMWare infrastructure and switch to AWS. Well, your existing ELA no longer works, you're back to square one, and the few rent-by-the-minute Oracle instances models available on AWS are obscenely expensive; even on AWS RDS it's a lot more expensive than SQL Server or Postgresql on similar VM models. They really want you to use the BYOL model, also known as the bend-over model.
Fuck Oracle.
lucm, indeed.
I use databases in embedded products.
Oracle is proprietary and probably not free.
MariaDB (MySQL) are not reliable, verified the hard way multiple times.
MongoDB is not structured; some found that fun, I found them horrible (for example to update the field of a record).
Postgresql is free, very reliable, and the last couple of versions can even manage unstructured data for the fanatics.
So the big shared part of the system consist in structured tables and notifications, while the clients applications that connect to it can store in JSON there private data if there like this format. Very powerful and run smoothly even on a tiny 0.5GHz Cortex-A5.
Not that I don't believe you, but can you cite your source here. I know Oracle's licensing can be obscene, but what you describe seems beyond the usual Oracle craziness
Look at this thread:
https://communities.vmware.com...
The good parts:
In this isolated environment, Oracle pretend to license every socket to any host connected to the V7000, regardless of the cluster that are connected the host.
and a reply:
yes I have heard this from several people and it was also the topic of a workshop on the annual german oracle uer group meeting. For your environment, oracle was even kind. As you can vMotion VMs even without shared storage since vSphere 5.1, they tend to say you have to license every host in your vCenter for their software, even if they are not connected to the same storage. When vMotion will be available across different vCenters I expect Oracle to even says you have to license every single ESXi host you have world wide in any datacenter
This is the same exact situation I've described.
We were in the process of reviewing the ELA and the Oracle reps gave us that info. They said it's even worse when it's iSCSI but as many people in the rooms were already shitting their pants or punching the walls we didn't discuss further the iSCSI part of the license (which didn't apply to us anyways).
lucm, indeed.
You can easily run create as many ORACLE_SIDs as you want in one ORACLE_HOME. Just export the environment variable for a new SID, login to sqlplus, CREATE DATABASE, then run CATALOG.SQL and CATPROC.SQL.
The problem with multiple ORACLE_SIDs is precisely the problem with VMs: the kernel is duplicated within each instance, which is a waste of RAM and storage.
I don't have enough instances to justify the new multitenant, but the idea behind it is the same as nspawn/Docker or Solaris Zones. There is only one kernel, and one set of OS binaries. Containers are rolled into the OS, which means that you can fit more "userland" on the system because you are only running one "kernel."
IDK if Microsoft has been doing this. Kudos if they have.
Oracle is popular with mission-critical enterprises, who have LARGE checkbooks, HUGE transaction volumes, and cannot afford ONE MINUTE of downtime.
This is not, and has never been, Microsoft's target market.
No one has attempted in quite some time to seriously challenge Oracle in massive transaction volumes.
You will notice that Oracle's top score is on SPARC, and is from nearly three years ago. There is no significant challenge to them on TPC-C.
The other fact is the most people also don't bother to pick up another language.
This is what boggles the mind. I don't anyone can be an expert on a language without knowing at least a couple of other languages fairly well. So you understand not only that things are done one way in a language, but why. And what the benefits and shortfalls are. And can work on interfacing different languages from both sides.
Java can be a good choice for many things, not the least because it's easy to hire developers. But unfortunately, I see it used for many things it's not well suited for, and by coders without any real programming skills.
If you are not aware of the absolutely widespread use of Java and Oracle, you are at best a hobbyist and at worst a schoolkid on some campus somewhere.
Someone is still using that piece of shit?! It takes the crown from MySQL for the worst database ever. Here's only the most recent example:
A coworker issued an update to a large table to which he didn't have update rights. Oracle's response? Drop the table!
Way to go, Oracle! This is only the latest reason my company has decided to ditch Oracle in favor of PostgreSQL.
And multiple databases per server? PostgreSQL has had that forever.
Since Oracle now owns Java and Solaris as well as MySQL and various brands of Linux, I wonder how they qualified between an Oracle-branded database and an Oracle Database.
Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
For large enterprise systems, there are not a lot of good options to begin with. Had the discussion with a college the other day. Apart from the two you mentioned (MariaDB and PostgreSQL), and the one that "won" Oracle, that really only leaves IBM DB2 (which I know little about).
If you work for an organization that outsources most of their technical talent, so can't have a bunch of experts on payroll, that pretty much rules out both MariaDB and PostgreSQL (which is really too bad as I have heard a lot of good things about PostgreSQL spatial GIS engine). This is because they need to be able to have access to external support from another big company (i.e. IBM or Oracle), and yes boy do they pay for it. However many would rather that than deal with staff and salary apparently. This really isn't a reflection of how "good" a DB is, but rather open VS closed source and support models VS staffing framework. Though technical documentation does count towards something. There *is* a ton of technical support for Oracle, though some leaves a bit to be desired. The other thing that isn't so fair, is that a lot of that is because Oracle has simply been around forever, but some of that will be for versions that no longer really apply anymore.
So regardless of how bogus the rating is, there really isn't enough players in the same category to really have much of a list to begin with. Though to rant with the rest, using the number of technical discussions on a particular DB, isn't exactly a good metric, as if it was good, it should be intuitive, and or not full of issues, requiring a lot of discussion, so pretty much the opposite of good. Also insofar as job postings and corresponding linkedin references (which are really just a mirror of that), most of the HR and/or Management boffins that put those things together probably have never heard of anything but Oracle, DB2, etc... and wouldn't know a MariaDB or PostgreSQL if it hit them in the face... so also not so good of a metric.