IBM Db2 Database Reviews

I was a heavy user of IBM Db2 Database. So, I used it for very complex queries because data extensively was with the mainframe database.

Considering the day-to-day activities in my company, around 30% of my work's contribution is possible because of IBM Db2 Database.

The solution's robustness is one of the most valuable features of IBM Db2 Database.

The solution's UI hasn't been upgraded. The solution’s UI is an area to improve because the solution was developed long ago. However, to date, they have been good at whatever they have been doing. But I feel that the solution's UI can be made more appealing.

Since the solution is functioning at its peak, there are no additional features that I would like to see in it.

I have been using IBM Db2 Database for four years. Also, it isn't the latest version that I use.

Stability-wise, I rate the solution an eight and a half out of ten.

Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten. Around 50 to 100 people in our organization are using the solution. We plan to increase the use of the solution because there are always new teams in our organization who install the solution for the new joiners and any other projects or contracts.

The initial setup was straightforward, especially if we compare IBM Db2 Database's setup phase with Toad for Oracle's setup process.

Even though I have seen a return on investment using the solution, I wouldn't be able to explain it with actual numbers.

The solution's pricing is fine.

I want to tell others who plan to use the solution that it is great for learning the heavy script and database queries. I can take on a couple of complex test plans, test procedures, and other related work. So, I think it's a very robust tool. Overall, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

I use IBM Db2 Database for an application that we use in the marketing sector.

I was a consultant.

When we use IBM Db2 Database, we are using a simple SQL server. I didn't use all of the features. It's mainly because when I worked, they used to set up Db2 for DB.

The most valuable aspect of this solution is its stability. We have never had any problems and have never had to contact technical support.

The scalability could be improved, but the problem was that it was something in the legacy of the application where I work.

The problem was not the DB itself, but there were certain limits regarding the application, and the DB was the final component, where we worked. We weren't too concerned with the DB.

It's expensive, but it's not for every client. 

Also, the website could be more intuitive. I didn't find it easy to find documentation on the website.

I have been working with IBM Db2 Database for one year.

IBM Db2 Database was stable, we didn't have any issues.

IBM Db2 Database is not scalable.

We have approximately 8, 000 clients.

We didn't have any issues with IBM Db2 Database. It was stable for us. We did not have the need to contact technical support.

I have some experience with Terraform, from HashiCorp. 

It's a tool for infrastructure, for building automation similar to Jenkins, or Bamboo.

I worked with Bamboo a year ago.

I have worked with databases such as MySQL, IBM Db2, Oracle DB, and some NoSQL databases like MongoDB. We use the threat procedures when we used Oracle DB.

When I worked within Db2, I didn't set up the Db2. I just used it. I didn't do any tuning or anything like that. I only performed some database management.

Clients are required to purchase a license.

I would recommend this solution to others who are interested in using it.

I would rate IBM Db2 Database a seven out of ten.

We primarily use the platform to store query data. I work in a bank, where we store customer information on it.

The product has improved our organization by performing well for data storage and queries. It helps us retrieve information quickly.

The solution's querying feature is most valuable. It allows me to retrieve data quickly.

The solution's data retrieval speed could be improved, especially for heavy queries. Better optimization or indexing might also be involved.

I have been working with IBM Db2 for about two years.

The product is mostly stable, even in a large organization like ours. 

I rate the stability a nine out of ten.

We manage around 15,000 to 20,000 platform users. I rate the scalability an eight out of ten. 

I do not interact directly with the technical support team. 

Our internal support team handles any issues and communicates with the provider.

The solution has been good with strong performance, contributing to our organization's efficiency.

We use the product combined with other solutions, such as SAP Crystal Reports and various reporting tools, but we do not directly integrate it with databases like SQL Server.

I rate it as ten because, despite occasional issues, it performs very well overall.

We use the solution for handling retail customer information. We use it as an integration broker. It stores all the vendor information.

We rely on it for our data transfers. If we need to send an invoice, for example, we'd use this product. 

The solution is very stable and reliable. It's a very mature product.

If you have specialized support, it's fine in terms of getting assistance.

The solution can scale. 

IBM gives us tools that help us 

When I look at Microsoft SQL Server, SQL Server provides me with better tools for database management. IBM is missing things like data permissions and backups, et cetera. Microsoft has a very user-friendly interface that IBM lacks. The user interface from IBM is not great.

I've used the solution on and off for the past ten years. 

It's a stable solution. It's been around for quite some time and is very mature. It's reliable. There are no bugs or glitches, and it doesn't crash or freeze. 

It's quite scalable. We haven't had any issues. We can reuse DB2 mainframes, et cetera. We haven't had issues. 

We're not increasing usage. We're pushing towards the cloud and Azure systems. 

We are a big customer of IBM and have some sort of specialized services. We have an elevated support agreement that helps. In general, it's not the greatest. That's only at a personal level.

Neutral

I am familiar with the Microsoft SQL Server, which is more user-friendly and has more user-friendly features. We're also exploring moving away from this solution to more cloud-based Azure services. 

The setup wasn't part of my job. We had a team that handled it. However, my understanding is it was straightforward. 

I don't deal with the pricing. I can't speak to its exact cost.

I'm not a database person. I'm a programmer. 

I'm using version nine in the company.

If a person wants to use the solution from a user perspective, I'd suggest they actually look at cloud programs, not IBM or on-premises. Cloud simplifies a lot of things. If I were starting from scratch, I'd go right to the could.

The reliability is excellent, and therefore I'd rate the solution eight out of ten. I only have issues with the user interface.

We work with a few use cases suggested by the IBM Watson Library. All the data is inside the event processor, we can extract it with a query. There are multiple use cases already in the IBM marketplace.

It's easy to search and extract data from the warehouse using queries.

The queries can be difficult for beginners because there are so many. I would like to see more use cases for flow analysis that enable us to correlate the flow with events. Adding this feature in a QI format would be good for beginners.

I have used Db2 for around two years.

I rate Db2 eight out of 10 for stability. 

I rate Db2 nine out of 10 for scalability. We have more than a thousand users. 

IBM's technical support is excellent. They provide a solution in 24 to 48 hours. 

Setting up Db2 is straightforward. Most IBM products I've used aren't complex to integrate or deploy. We deploy it on-premise and in the cloud.

I rate IBM Db2 two out of 10 for affordability. It's expensive but not much more than other tools. There are also cloud-based solutions like Elasticsearch. 

There are multiple competitors like Oracle, but Db2 is the best for our use case.

I rate IBM Db2 nine out of 10. It's more expensive, but it's better than the competing solutions. I have to deduct a point for license costs. Everything else is excellent. We recommend Db2 to many clients, but few adopt it due to the high price tag. If a project has strict budgetary restraints, we typically don't recommend Db2. 

It is installed on the mainframe that we use for our applications.

It's the best solution in terms of security, performance, and availability because the system is available 24/7.

The problem with this environment is that any software that you install is very costly because there are no free tools for this environment.

The environment itself comes at a very high cost because the mainframe machine is very costly, and the licensing cost is very high as well.

I've been using IBM Db2 Database for the past 22 years.

It's very stable, and the performance is very good.

We use IBM technical support for the big bugs related to the operating system and the database. We haven't faced any problems with the database. Sometimes, with the operating system we need some fixes, and technical support has sent us those. On the application side, our team develops the application and solves any problems related to it.

Previously, we used COBOL with a database sold by Computer Associates. We didn't have lot of choices for mainframes at the time. The best database that can run on the mainframe is the IBM Db2 Database, and we have stayed with Db2 from 2000 to the present.

The initial setup was quite simple because we've been working in this area for more than 40 years.

It took about a year and a half to develop and deploy the whole application.

We developed the application, and we deployed it using a solution strategy. We have an IBM partner who gave us all the software that we needed, and we implemented it ourselves.

We had three system engineers, two people for the database, and two people for the application.

Our ROI is big because we earned about 100 billion in our currency.

It's very expensive for West African countries like ours.

We are currently in discussions with IBM concerning the reduction of licensing costs. We have a license based on the capacity of the machine and are looking into a license based on usage.

There weren't a lot of choices for mainframes at the time.

If you're going to use it for the first time, you would need lot of training and some technical support. You would need support during development as well.

I would rate this solution at nine on a scale from one to ten.

We primarily use the solution as the main data store warehouse for the corporation.

It's great as a backend database system utilized to store the data for the entire corporate structure.

Due to the fact that we're going to go with the hardware-specifics of the fact that it's bundled in IBM i, it's exceedingly reliable, as the architecture of the IBM i just does not go down.

It runs very well. It runs very solid. It does everything that I expect it to do. It offers all of the standard RDBMS functionalities and capabilities. I consider Db2 to be a direct competitor with Oracle and SQL servers any day of the week. The difference is what flavor of Db2 you're going to run. You're going to run the Linux Unix, are going to run the IBM i version, and then it comes down to, for me, the IBM i, due to the fact that the architecture does not fail. It does not go down. It does not get hacked. There's never been a successful hacking of an IBM i architecture. You're looking at an environment where your data is extremely secure, compared to a lot of the other RDBMS systems.

The solution is configurable and has what you would consider to be a desktop management configuration capability too. You can partition it off, and you can set up different instances of it and such. The interface is more than adequate. There's nothing great about it, there's nothing poor about it. It's more than capable of doing what you need to do if you do need to do DBA maintenance kind of work to it.

It's going to be a much smaller marketplace for this product, and most significantly, IBM doesn't target marketing to that marketplace. Their view of it is they're maintaining it, they're continuing to upgrade it, they're continuing to grow it, however, they don't go out and try and sell that as an architectural solution the way they do Linux and Unix. That's because once you get inside of the IBM architecture, up until about six or eight years ago, it was not open source. You were tied to the development language of either COBOL or the development language of RPG if you wanted to develop on that platform.

Now, it now supports Java and PHP, and it does open source, but for those reasons, IBM was never looking to market or push that as a viable solution. They didn't push the IBM i as a direct competitor to Oracle, they pushed their Linux Unix versions of it, their IBM Z series against Oracle and SQL server, as it's a more direct head-to-head comparison. The IBM i architecture is the one-off if you will. You're not going to see a lot of people looking at it.

I've been using the solution for 25 years at this point. It's been a while. 

The solution is stable and reliable. The hardware does not fail, the software does not fail, and so the reliability is there, however, the reliability isn't necessarily Db2, it's the fact that it's the IBM i that has the reliability. Db2 is inheriting that, and again, is staying up and running because of that.

The system scales very well. It runs the new power nine chips and it's about to run the new power 10 chips that IBM is releasing as well. For that reason, the current systems out there are 16 CPU Power 10 processors that can have terabytes of memory associated with them. It performs extremely well in the environment. 

The system is very scalable to very large magnitudes. There are some very large Fortune 10 and Fortune 15 companies that run Db2 systems and can attest to the scalability

IBM's technical support is fine and their people are good. When you give them a call they get after it. We're satisfied with the level of service provided. 

The initial setup is very straightforward. Due to the fact that it's bundled inside of the system, you don't have to do any special implementation. As soon as you have the system up and running, and the operating system running, Db2 is already running. There was an instance of it running on the architecture at that moment. There's absolutely zero setup in that environment.

It's hard to separate out the exact pricing. It's bundled; you can't compare head-to-head against Oracle and SQL server at that point, as the costing is embedded inside of the purchase of the operating system software.

We're not a software provider, we're an end-user.

When you start talking about Db2 on Linux and Unix, the current version is version 17.3 or 17.4. The IBM i, the versioning doesn't work the same way, it has to do with the operating system levels that you're running, as to which version of Db2 you're in. It's integrated in with the system, operating system. It's not actually an independent version of Db2, it's integrated in with the operating system on that platform.

Db2 is different in our architectural world than standalone Db2. It's not like standing up an instance of Db2 would be the same as it would in Oracle, or a Microsoft SQL instance, on a Windows 10 server or a Windows 2008 server or whatever it may be. It's the fact that it's bundled in with the software, with the operating system, with the hardware, when you buy that machine. Since it's all bundled inside of it, we're having to go out and independently do things with it. It's inherent, it's bundled. It's probably not the best example of Db2, because even when IBM goes out and talks about Db2, they talk about Db2 zOS, which is the Linux Unix installation. You very rarely see them talking about the IBM i installations. In fact, in even the documentation I was reading in the comparisons, it was comparing the Linux Unix IBM Db2 against Oracle, and against the Microsoft SQL Server.

If you're looking at an alternative to Oracle or to Microsoft SQL server, look at Db2, and then once you're in Db2's world, take a look at IBM i against the IBM Z, and compare the two of them. The stigma that the IBM i has, is that RPG language barrier. Since that barrier has now been removed, you can do everything that you can do on the IBM Z as well. The stability of the platform is what people need to look at. There is a trade-off of uptime and never been hacked operating system against versus Microsoft and Oracle in the news every single day. Microsoft cloud just made a comment in the last 48, 72 hours about their cloud services being hacked. That's just something you do not see happening with that IBM series architecture.

Since Db2 rides inside of very secure architecture, people should probably give it a very good, hard look, compared to Oracle and Microsoft, and say, "Hey it might not be as popular. It might not be as big a deal, but if my data is more secure, and I don't have downtime and I have performance, is it something that we should be looking at?" 

I've been at companies that have looked to move off of that, and when they've looked at the Oracle solution, and, no matter how you power it, and no matter how you scale it, whether you scale it up or you scale it wide, the performance is simply just not there compared to what the IBM systems offer through their Db2, whether it be the i or the Z through what they offer internally in their performance capabilities. Your iOS, your throughputs, your performance cycles, you cannot touch it with Microsoft or with Oracle scalability-wise. That is far and away the most scalable systems and the highest performing systems of the set of them.

I'd rate the solution at a ten out of ten.

Our company uses the solution as a database service for a client in the furniture manufacturing industry. 

The solution's security is very tough and impenetrable. 

Hardware and support subscriptions are very expensive. Better partnerships in the Middle East or Egypt could reduce costs. 

The solution no longer supports POWER8. 

I have been using the solution for ten years. 

The solution is very, very stable. 

The scalability is an issue for us because Database Hammer does not work with IBM Power and POWER9 is too expensive. 

Technical support is very helpful and better than competitors such as Dell, Lenovo, or HP. 

We previously used POWER5 and POWER7 so have been with the solution for some time. 

The setup is very easy and we accomplished it through self education. 

We implemented the solution in-house. 

The solution's hardware and subscription model for support are very expensive in the Middle East or Egypt. 

I rate cost a three out of ten. 

Database Hammer does not work with IBM Power or POWER8. It is too expensive for us to purchase POWER9 so we are migrating to AWS and comparing that to Azure. 

Currently, our server and database are shut down and not in use. 

Stability, mobility, and security are rated a ten out of ten but the extreme cost changes my overall rating to a five out of ten.