Welcome To T24All
Welcome, Guest
Username Password:

jBase vs Oracle
(1 viewing) (1) Guest
  • Page:
  • 1

TOPIC: jBase vs Oracle

jBase vs Oracle 1 year, 10 months ago #4633

  • RLHC
  • OFFLINE
  • Fresh Boarder
  • Posts: 7
  • Karma: 0
Hi all,

Anyone knows about the different (in terms of performance) between the solution T24 plus jBase + Oracle and T24 plus jBase only? which solution will have a better solution?

Regards
RL

Re:jBase vs Oracle 1 year, 10 months ago #4636

  • Lior
  • OFFLINE
  • Expert Boarder
  • Posts: 107
  • Karma: 0
Hello,

As you mentioned in your question, working with Oracle does not exclude the jBASE layer.
Meaning, T24 will still write, read, update and delete the jBASE tables, however a driver will translate these operations to Oracle.
For example, a write operation will be performed to the jBASE table, the driver will take over, translate the jBASE record to XML and then write the XML string to an Oracle table.
A read operation will be performed from T24 to jBASE which in turn will go to Oracle, read the record, the result XML will be translated to jBASE format and sent to T24.

As you can see there are extra 2 moves (XML translation) and writing/reading Oracle table.

As far as I know in terms of performance, working with Oracle will need more cpu power and more disk space.
At best you will get same performance as it was with jBASE only.

Re:jBase vs Oracle 1 year, 10 months ago #4637

  • RLHC
  • OFFLINE
  • Fresh Boarder
  • Posts: 7
  • Karma: 0
Hi Lior,

Thx for ur clarification.

Seems taht hat for the solution with jBase + Oracle, it will add extra moves for the XML translation, so, which means that the performance with jBase alone will be better then jBase + Oracle, am I correct? If so, then, why this solution will be used? Is it just used to overcome the limitation of 2GB for system file used in jBase?

As far as I know, for the jBase release 5, it has already overcome the 2GB system file limitation, if this is true, then, we don't need solution with jBase + Oracle?

Re:jBase vs Oracle 1 year, 10 months ago #4639

  • Lior
  • OFFLINE
  • Expert Boarder
  • Posts: 107
  • Karma: 0
In my opinion the reason that Temenos is using Oracle (as well as Microsoft SQL server) is actually 3 fold:

1. Marketing/Positioning
Using data bases as Oracle/SQL server position T24 better in the market and make it easier to sell T24 rather than relatively obscure data base (jBASE)
It especially helps in big organizations.

2. sales Support
Oracle and Microsoft should help promote and see T24 using their technologies

3. Technical
jBASE have some difficulties.
Whether it is the 2GB limitation you mentioned, files getting corrupted and in general handling big amounts of data.
Using Oracle/SQL server averts most of these issues.


The decision which way to go, depends on your organization:
How many users, customers, accounts, etc.
What is the technology used in the Bank.
What is the budget.
are only some of the considerations.

I can only say that in my experience any Bank that worked with jBASE and decided to move to Oracle did not get better performance.

Re:jBase vs Oracle 1 year, 10 months ago #4640

  • RLHC
  • OFFLINE
  • Fresh Boarder
  • Posts: 7
  • Karma: 0
Hi Lior,

Regarding your last point on the choice of database. let's say, if our company is small to medium size, which one should be better? jBase or Oracle?

Re:jBase vs Oracle 1 year, 10 months ago #4709

  • Thushantha
  • OFFLINE
  • Junior Boarder
  • Posts: 29
  • Karma: 1
Hi,

Advatages with Oracle
1. High Availability
2. Data Protection
As per my experience with oracle we have not lost a single bite since last 8 years
, We have never done restoration to production. We experience many power failures just after starting machine we have started the databases. it's fully automatic recovery and no manual internention at all. But incase of jbase you may have to have a top level of skills to overcome the situation.

jBase almost free and for oracle you need to spend dollars.
decision is on you hands...
  • Page:
  • 1
Time to create page: 0.32 seconds