Amazon ElastiCache vs Oracle

Overview

Amazon ElastiCache

Stacks1.3K

Followers1.0K

Votes151

Oracle

Stacks2.6K

Followers1.8K

Votes113

Amazon ElastiCache vs Oracle: What are the differences?

Introduction:

Amazon ElastiCache and Oracle are both popular data caching services that help improve the performance and scalability of applications. However, they have several key differences in terms of their features and capabilities.

Data Structures and Caching Mechanisms: Amazon ElastiCache supports multiple data structures such as in-memory key-value stores (Redis, Memcached) and real-time analytics (Apache Spark). In contrast, Oracle provides an in-memory database technology called Oracle TimesTen that is optimized for real-time performance.
Compatibility and Integration: Amazon ElastiCache integrates seamlessly with various AWS services like Amazon EC2, Amazon RDS, and Amazon CloudWatch. It also supports popular open-source caching engines. On the other hand, Oracle can be seamlessly integrated with Oracle Database and Oracle Exadata systems, providing advanced query acceleration and compatibility with SQL-based applications.
Scalability: ElastiCache offers automatic scalability by allowing users to easily add or remove cache nodes as per the workload requirements. It can automatically scale up to meet high demand and scale down during periods of low activity. Oracle also provides scalability through its TimesTen database technology, enabling real-time scalability for demanding applications.
Data Durability and Persistence: Amazon ElastiCache allows users to persist their data by enabling Redis or Memcached data snapshots and backups. Oracle provides durability and persistence through features like Automatic Storage Management (ASM) and Crash Recovery Mechanisms, ensuring data integrity and availability even in the event of system failures.
Deployment and Management Model: ElastiCache is a fully managed service, which means Amazon takes care of the infrastructure and administrative tasks. Users can focus on their applications without worrying about the underlying infrastructure. On the other hand, Oracle offers different deployment models, including on-premises, cloud, and hybrid deployments, giving users more flexibility in managing their caching environment.
Pricing and Cost: Amazon ElastiCache follows a pay-as-you-go pricing model based on the cache node type and usage. The cost includes the infrastructure, maintenance, and support provided by AWS. Oracle's pricing model varies depending on factors such as licensing, resource consumption, and support agreements. It is typically more complex and may require additional licensing costs for specific features and functionalities.

In Summary, Amazon ElastiCache and Oracle differ in terms of data structures, compatibility, scalability, data durability, deployment models, and pricing. Understanding these differences can help organizations choose the right caching solution based on their specific requirements and preferences.

Share your Stack

Help developers discover the tools you use. Get visibility for your team's tech choices and contribute to the community's knowledge.

View Docs

CLI (Node.js)

Manual

Advice on Amazon ElastiCache, Oracle

Daniel

Data Engineer at Dimensigon

Jul 18, 2020

Decided

We have chosen Tibero over Oracle because we want to offer a PL/SQL-as-a-Service that the users can deploy in any Cloud without concerns from our website at some standard cost. With Oracle Database, developers would have to worry about what they implement and the related costs of each feature but the licensing model from Tibero is just 1 price and we have all features included, so we don't have to worry and developers using our SQLaaS neither. PostgreSQL would be open source. We have chosen Tibero over Oracle because we want to offer a PL/SQL that you can deploy in any Cloud without concerns. PostgreSQL would be the open source option but we need to offer an SQLaaS with encryption and more enterprise features in the background and best value option we have found, it was Tibero Database for PL/SQL-based applications.

496k views496k

Comments

Abigail

Dec 6, 2019

Decided

In the field of bioinformatics, we regularly work with hierarchical and unstructured document data. Unstructured text data from PDFs, image data from radiographs, phylogenetic trees and cladograms, network graphs, streaming ECG data... none of it fits into a traditional SQL database particularly well. As such, we prefer to use document oriented databases.

MongoDB is probably the oldest component in our stack besides Javascript, having been in it for over 5 years. At the time, we were looking for a technology that could simply cache our data visualization state (stored in JSON) in a database as-is without any destructive normalization. MongoDB was the perfect tool; and has been exceeding expectations ever since.

Trivia fact: some of the earliest electronic medical records (EMRs) used a document oriented database called MUMPS as early as the 1960s, prior to the invention of SQL. MUMPS is still in use today in systems like Epic and VistA, and stores upwards of 40% of all medical records at hospitals. So, we saw MongoDB as something as a 21st century version of the MUMPS database.

540k views540k

Comments

Abigail

Dec 10, 2019

Decided

We wanted a JSON datastore that could save the state of our bioinformatics visualizations without destructive normalization. As a leading NoSQL data storage technology, MongoDB has been a perfect fit for our needs. Plus it's open source, and has an enterprise SLA scale-out path, with support of hosted solutions like Atlas. Mongo has been an absolute champ. So much so that SQL and Oracle have begun shipping JSON column types as a new feature for their databases. And when Fast Healthcare Interoperability Resources (FHIR) announced support for JSON, we basically had our FHIR datalake technology.

558k views558k

Comments

Detailed Comparison

Amazon ElastiCache	Oracle
ElastiCache improves the performance of web applications by allowing you to retrieve information from fast, managed, in-memory caches, instead of relying entirely on slower disk-based databases. ElastiCache supports Memcached and Redis.	Oracle Database is an RDBMS. An RDBMS that implements object-oriented features such as user-defined types, inheritance, and polymorphism is called an object-relational database management system (ORDBMS). Oracle Database has extended the relational model to an object-relational model, making it possible to store complex business models in a relational database.
Support for two engines: Memcached and Redis;Ease of management via the AWS Management Console. With a few clicks you can configure and launch instances for the engine you wish to use.;Compatibility with the specific engine protocol. This means most of the client libraries will work with the respective engines they were built for - no additional changes or tweaking required.;Detailed monitoring statistics for the engine nodes at no extra cost via Amazon CloudWatch;Pay only for the resources you consume based on node hours used	-
Statistics
Stacks 1.3K	Stacks 2.6K
Followers 1.0K	Followers 1.8K
Votes 151	Votes 113
Pros & Cons
Pros 58 Redis 32 High-performance 26 Backed by amazon 21 Memcached 14 Elastic	Pros 44 Reliable 33 Enterprise 15 High Availability 5 Expensive 5 Hard to maintain Cons 14 Expensive

What are some alternatives to Amazon ElastiCache, Oracle?

MongoDB

MongoDB stores data in JSON-like documents that can vary in structure, offering a dynamic, flexible schema. MongoDB was also designed for high availability and scalability, with built-in replication and auto-sharding.

MySQL

The MySQL software delivers a very fast, multi-threaded, multi-user, and robust SQL (Structured Query Language) database server. MySQL Server is intended for mission-critical, heavy-load production systems as well as for embedding into mass-deployed software.

PostgreSQL

PostgreSQL is an advanced object-relational database management system that supports an extended subset of the SQL standard, including transactions, foreign keys, subqueries, triggers, user-defined types and functions.

Microsoft SQL Server

Microsoft® SQL Server is a database management and analysis system for e-commerce, line-of-business, and data warehousing solutions.

SQLite

SQLite is an embedded SQL database engine. Unlike most other SQL databases, SQLite does not have a separate server process. SQLite reads and writes directly to ordinary disk files. A complete SQL database with multiple tables, indices, triggers, and views, is contained in a single disk file.

Cassandra

Partitioning means that Cassandra can distribute your data across multiple machines in an application-transparent matter. Cassandra will automatically repartition as machines are added and removed from the cluster. Row store means that like relational databases, Cassandra organizes data by rows and columns. The Cassandra Query Language (CQL) is a close relative of SQL.

Memcached

Memcached is an in-memory key-value store for small chunks of arbitrary data (strings, objects) from results of database calls, API calls, or page rendering.

MariaDB

Started by core members of the original MySQL team, MariaDB actively works with outside developers to deliver the most featureful, stable, and sanely licensed open SQL server in the industry. MariaDB is designed as a drop-in replacement of MySQL(R) with more features, new storage engines, fewer bugs, and better performance.

RethinkDB

RethinkDB is built to store JSON documents, and scale to multiple machines with very little effort. It has a pleasant query language that supports really useful queries like table joins and group by, and is easy to setup and learn.

ArangoDB

A distributed free and open-source database with a flexible data model for documents, graphs, and key-values. Build high performance applications using a convenient SQL-like query language or JavaScript extensions.

Related Comparisons

Amazon ElastiCache vs Oracle: What are the differences?

Introduction:

Data Structures and Caching Mechanisms: Amazon ElastiCache supports multiple data structures such as in-memory key-value stores (Redis, Memcached) and real-time analytics (Apache Spark). In contrast, Oracle provides an in-memory database technology called Oracle TimesTen that is optimized for real-time performance.
Compatibility and Integration: Amazon ElastiCache integrates seamlessly with various AWS services like Amazon EC2, Amazon RDS, and Amazon CloudWatch. It also supports popular open-source caching engines. On the other hand, Oracle can be seamlessly integrated with Oracle Database and Oracle Exadata systems, providing advanced query acceleration and compatibility with SQL-based applications.
Scalability: ElastiCache offers automatic scalability by allowing users to easily add or remove cache nodes as per the workload requirements. It can automatically scale up to meet high demand and scale down during periods of low activity. Oracle also provides scalability through its TimesTen database technology, enabling real-time scalability for demanding applications.
Data Durability and Persistence: Amazon ElastiCache allows users to persist their data by enabling Redis or Memcached data snapshots and backups. Oracle provides durability and persistence through features like Automatic Storage Management (ASM) and Crash Recovery Mechanisms, ensuring data integrity and availability even in the event of system failures.
Deployment and Management Model: ElastiCache is a fully managed service, which means Amazon takes care of the infrastructure and administrative tasks. Users can focus on their applications without worrying about the underlying infrastructure. On the other hand, Oracle offers different deployment models, including on-premises, cloud, and hybrid deployments, giving users more flexibility in managing their caching environment.
Pricing and Cost: Amazon ElastiCache follows a pay-as-you-go pricing model based on the cache node type and usage. The cost includes the infrastructure, maintenance, and support provided by AWS. Oracle's pricing model varies depending on factors such as licensing, resource consumption, and support agreements. It is typically more complex and may require additional licensing costs for specific features and functionalities.

Amazon ElastiCache vs Oracle

Overview