| ▲ | mike_hearn 7 hours ago | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
That was true years ago but these days there's the autonomous database offering, where DB operations are almost all automated. You can rent them in the cloud and you just get the connection strings/wallet and go. Examples of stuff it automates: backups, scaling up/down, (as mentioned) adding indexes automatically, query plan A/B testing to catch bad replans, you can pin plans if you need to, rolling upgrades without downtime, automated application of security patches (if you want that), etc. So yeah running a relational DB used to be quite high effort but it got a lot better over time. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | tracker1 7 hours ago | parent [-] | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
At that point, you can say the same for PostgreSQL, which is more broadly supported across all major and minor cloud platforms with similar features and I'm assuming a lower cost and barrier of entry. This is without signing with Oracle, Inc... which tends to bring a lot of lock-in behaviors that come with those feature sets. TBF, I haven't had to use Oracle in about a decade at this point... so I'm not sure how well it competes... My experiences with the corporate entity itself leave a lot to be desired, let alone just getting setup/started with local connectivity has always been what I considered extremely painful vs common alternatives. MS-SQL was always really nice to get setup, but more recently has had a lot of difficulties, in particular with docker/dev instances and more under arm (mac) than alternatives. I'm a pretty big fan of PG, which is, again, very widely available and supported. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||