No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Oracle Database In-Memory vs kdb+ comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

kdb+
Ranking in Relational Databases Tools
35th
Average Rating
9.0
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Oracle Database In-Memory
Ranking in Relational Databases Tools
10th
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
33
Ranking in other categories
Embedded Database (3rd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2026, in the Relational Databases Tools category, the mindshare of kdb+ is 0.9%, up from 0.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Oracle Database In-Memory is 2.2%, up from 1.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Relational Databases Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Oracle Database In-Memory2.2%
kdb+0.9%
Other96.9%
Relational Databases Tools
 

Featured Reviews

Nitin Garg - PeerSpot reviewer
Vice President - Financial Services at Evalueserve
An easy-to-deploy solution that can be used for data ingestion and usage
I work for a fintech company where we create several strategies generally built on finance data, which are like one-time series data. We deal with huge bulk data on a daily basis, and we use kdb+ for data ingestion and usage The most valuable feature of kdb+ is the speed at which it returns the…
Hosney Osman - PeerSpot reviewer
Technical Solution Architect at Vodafone
Real-time analytics have transformed response times and support huge data volumes with compression
I do not have any comment related to the improvement of the solution; for sure, it needs improvement, but for my use cases, it is very sufficient, and I think for the biggest companies, it needs a very powerful infrastructure. The area where improvement is required the most in the product is the UI. The problem with the UI is that it is not complex for understanding, but it needs some training to know what each button does, how it works, and the many variables needed.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"The solution returns data quickly, and data retrieval is fast in kdb+."
"The solution's ROI is excellent."
"It efficiently handles low-code data and supports read-and-write operations for clustering."
"Performance is probably the number one feature, because when we use it for OLTP, the response for the end-user is pretty fast, with website response times in micro milliseconds instead of waiting a few seconds for a page to load."
"Database In-Memory, to me, is the most compelling reason to go to Oracle 12c, release 1."
"The most valuable aspects of this solution are the fast caching and improved performance to the database."
"After we started using the in-memory product, we saw really dramatic figures."
"The warehouse is the solution's most valuable aspect."
"I like Oracle because it is a backward-compatible solution."
 

Cons

"The solution should have a more user-friendly user interface."
"They should lower the price. My customers think that it's too expensive."
"The area where improvement is required the most in the product is the UI."
"The product could benefit from enhancements in its graphical user interface."
"Oracle should include column store or advanced query optimization so a database can be optimized by enabling analytic queries to run faster."
"We have a very large table and a low dose. It is very expensive in data to load all of them into In-Memory. It takes up more memory slots in the server, as well as a lot of RAM."
"The dashboard requires some refreshment or configuration improvements."
"Technical support is useful with the My Oracle Support website. But when I have to open a service request, I have to find a solution on my own because technical support usually doesn't understand my problem or they always ask for the same logs, same questions, and I ultimately waste my time."
"Lacks sufficient integration with other tools."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"Oracle Database In-Memory is expensive."
"The product is expensive."
"The platform's licensing cost needs improvement."
"The solution's pricing is high."
"The pricing is pretty good so I rate it an eight out of ten."
"Database In-Memory is priced a bit higher than its competitors like Microsoft."
"It's quite costly and it comes with a fixed price."
"I rate the pricing a zero out of ten because Database In-Memory is too costly."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Relational Databases Tools solutions are best for your needs.
893,221 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
44%
Energy/Utilities Company
5%
Comms Service Provider
5%
Construction Company
5%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Comms Service Provider
9%
Marketing Services Firm
7%
Manufacturing Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business6
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise23
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What needs improvement with Oracle Database In-Memory?
I do not have any comment related to the improvement of the solution; for sure, it needs improvement, but for my use cases, it is very sufficient, and I think for the biggest companies, it needs a ...
What is your primary use case for Oracle Database In-Memory?
The major use case for Oracle Database In-Memory is real-time applications that need a fast response between the application and the database directly without any latency.
 

Comparisons

 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

UniCredit, AIRBUS
Shanghai Customs
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, Oracle, SAP and others in Relational Databases Tools. Updated: April 2026.
893,221 professionals have used our research since 2012.