What features of Oracle make it an attractive choice for small projects? Given Oracle's licensing handling[a] (and, to a lesser extent, cost) I have always been wondering what the deciding factors would be for choosing Oracle over PostgreSQL or MySQL.

My company is nearly always choosing Oracle (XE where possible), even for small projects where there is just a single simple Windows server box running the database without any dedicated DB administration. (Note that small does not mean the data will always fit the rather small size constraints of Oracle XE.)

I have always questioned this choice, but it has the benefit that we at least are exposed to only one database product.

Still, given a new project, where you need a RDBMS, but the project and scope of the database is pretty small, based on which unique features of Oracle running on simple Windows server boxes (without too much dedicated administration) would you choose Oracle over another RDBMS?

Additional Context: A lot of our database deployments run at customer sites in a, lets call it, "low-administration" mode. That is, the database is set up once. There is some initial testing on its correct behavior and performance on site. After this, the database just run's on its on. No regular administration done. Only if somethings broken will a technician (not a dedicated DBA) check the database, trying to figure out what's up. Backup is mostly done as offline backup. In some projects, the customers don't even care there's a RDBMS involved. They just see their app as a black box that works (or not).

[a] : Where I work, it took several project managers repeatedly months to get proper licensing for small projects as the local Oracle representatives are simply not very interested in selling their product if the revenue is smallish.
I can only attempt to answer for Oracle and postgres. After using Oracle exclusively for years, and postgres only for the last two years or so, I love postgres. There are so many small ways it is more convenient to use than Oracle, and it shares many of the crucial benefits (such as MVCC). It is easier to administer, reliable, has excellent documentation, and of course, it is free.

However postgres is no match for Oracle in some areas, such as:


RAC - as far as I know there is no better clustering technology for any database
RMAN - far superior to postgres's basic backup and recovery features, especially with block change tracking and incremental backups (which you can apply to other backups to keep an up to date full backup)
Oracle support - exists. postgres support? Not so much
many other features such as IOTs, 'Secure Files' and compression technology that have no analogue in the postgres world


Interestingly almost all af these features are absent or crippled in XE. I think I'd choose postgres over XE, all else being equal, but...

...none of this addresses the two biggest reasons for choosing Oracle:


You are already using Oracle and you have a huge investment in it (database independence is a silly myth)
Your developers and DBAs know Oracle and use its features to the full (why wouldn't they as database independence is a silly myth anyway?)


EDIT:

The one situation where I'd choose postgres over XE every time is if security is a concern. If your database or any of it's applications are exposed to the public internet I am not sure if XE is a good idea at all.