IBM Db2 Database Reviews

I'm using this solution for a financial network. I make and prepare the databases for analysis.

I'm using version 11.5. There are 1,200 people using this solution in my organization. It's deployed on-premise.

It's very secure.

The command line part of this solution could be much better. Redshift is a lot better. It's easier to work with them. IBM Db2 is a little bit outdated.

I've been using this solution for two years.

It's scalable.

Technical support isn't very helpful when I've had problems.

It's not easy to set up. It takes a long time, especially compared to other solutions.

It's very expensive.

I would rate this solution 6 out of 10.

We use it for the core banking business. We have Db2 for z/OS 2.4 on the IBM mainframe machine. It is on-premises of one of the big banks in Israel.

Its robustness, scalability, availability, and performance are valuable. All these are the major attributes of a relational database for supporting a very high-volume business, and Db2 is very good in all those areas and in all those attributes.

They should simplify the management of Db2 as a relational database system. There should be the simplification of management. This is probably one of the most important asks for being successful in the future.

They should add AI support for performance improvements for application and system performance and tuning management. AI is a very deep and complex product. There are thousands of parameters, and it is very hard to do it manually. So, I would suggest developing an AI system to do the monitoring, tuning, and performance improvements.

I have been using this product for 40 years.

It is very stable. There are organizations where Db2 has been working for more than a year and sometimes, for many years without going down. The operating system as well as Db2 work for a long time. There is no downtime at all.

It is very scalable. There are about 250 application systems with even more different databases on the same server with data sharing.

Their technical support is okay. It was better 10 years ago, but it is still okay.

It must be done by a professional. It is not a simple task. Somebody with quite significant experience must do the initial setup. It is difficult.

It is expensive.

I would rate IBM Db2 Database an eight out of 10.

The primary uses for this product have to do with the card management system for banks. We are working mostly in the financial sector and banking sector, so there are some card management systems there that we often work with. There are some databases for which we see value in using Db2, so we are working with this solution.  

One of the things I like most about Db2 is that it is almost maintenance-free. I do not have to maintain it, unlike a modal database. I have been using modal databases for a long time and those are more sensitive. It is almost 15 years now that I have been using modal databases and it is almost tedious to use modal databases by comparison. I have been using the Db2 more recently and both database types are in use in my company. With a modal database, I have to check to see how or if the data is coming through. But in Db2, it is not as much of a headache. It is also easier to understand than modal database structures.  

One thing that is a little bit difficult for me — other than when using Oracle — is creating database replication with Db2. It is not so easy. That feature could be improved.  

Another thing is that if part of the environment in Db2 goes down, I have to restore all of it. That is something that is just in the environment for the Db2 relational database. The restoration is very difficult because every node has internal storage. If one node is corrupted all have to get restored.  

If you compare Db2 to Oracle, both are enterprise-class. However, the development tools for Db2 are not as good. For example, if I want to develop an application in Db2, I have to use Java. That is not so easy because someone has to know the Java platform and a few other things to develop an application on Db2. But the difference is that if you choose to use Oracle there are some tools like Oracle Developers Suite that you can use to develop applications. It is very easy and very straightforward to develop an application in Oracle because of the development tools. It is harder when using Db2 by comparison.  

There are some things that are not in Db2. I have to do more to develop an application. Some things are easy to do with Db2 development. Like if I have an application where there will be three or four tables. I can do that with Db2, or I have to do it with other Java development tools. That is the catch: for most of the people who know Java, this development is easy for them. But those who do not know Java can have a very hard time. In that sense, IBM should work on that aspect of their product to make it easy to develop applications. They can do this by providing users with a development suite. If they do that, then I think Db2 has the potential to grow more in our market.  

I have been using Db2 for almost eight years.  

The stability of Db2 is good. It is very stable. Once we have the installation complete and the team is done with the job, there are some customers who go five years without having to do anything to Db2. It is very stable and runs smoothly for them the entire time.  

With scalability, I do not have as much experience as other teams in our group because I am on the sales end. I do not have experience on that side. Because we are a business partner of IBM, we all understand the use of Db2. In our company, the main focus is always on what the customer wants and what kind of applications they want to build. As we are working in the financial sector, they have DBS (Disclosure and Barring Service) and these requirements need to be fulfilled. What the customer wants ends up determining which database we suggest that they go for. In that sense, our market is mostly Oracle. But if they are trying to keep their budget concerns in check, then we will go for Db2, because it is less costly than Oracle.  

I find the technical support team is not so aggressive as Oracle. If I put in a request or a ticket it takes time for the team at IBM to reply. Almost always at that point, they are not replying with an answer. I have to do something to give them more information. They could be more efficient in the way that issues are handled. With Oracle, it will not take even half an hour and they take a readout and give you a solution. Oracle's support is very straightforward.  

I think that IBM needs to do better in training its support service to improve response time and efficiency. They should have a better structure to their support request responses and better procedures to follow. Right now, these procedures are not in place.  

In my scenario, I have installed both Db2 and Oracle for different use cases. I have not personally found that much of a difference. But I think the difference between this Db2 is what the customer wants. Some want to work on Db2 and some want to work with Oracle.  

One feature I like in Db2 is the self-maintenance feature. That maintenance feature or something like it is not found in Oracle. With Db2, it is safe to use self-maintenance with any data and that is the main feature in Db2 that I like.  

The initial setup for Db2 is really straightforward. Their deployment and integration are very easy and straightforward. The environment takes a maximum of 40 minutes for installation. I have done it by myself. The complete deployment is not so easy that it is a simple repetition to do the same way on every site, but two or three weeks will be all that you need for an enterprise installation.  

The pricing is done by our pricing team and the quotes are given to the client's finance team. So in that sense, I do not have direct experience with the pricing models. I can say that Db2 is less costly than Oracle because I am selling both and I am doing enterprise sales for both. When a customer gets a quote during the buying process, I can see the pricing. The pricing for Db2 is always less than Oracle.  

On a scale from one to ten (where one is the worst and ten is the best), I would rate IBM Db2 Database as a seven-out-of-ten.  

Most of the time recommending Db2 is harder than recommending Oracle because of the situation in our country. Whenever I propose Db2 to a customer, the customer will ask what they need to have to develop applications on Db2. I have to say to them that they need to have a Java developer to work on that. If the customer already has some Oracle databases, this makes introducing Db2 even more difficult because they already have the resources for Oracle development. Suggesting Db2 is difficult in our country because most of the people already have Oracle now. So suggesting Db2 is difficult because development on Db2 is not as easy as Oracle and finding the resources to work with it is not as easy. The question we have to answer all the time is who will do the development if the customer does not have a Java developer resource already.  

We use the solution as a database for e-commerce applications.

The solution's most valuable feature is scalability.

The platform itself needs improvement. They should develop a containerized version of the solution. In addition, they should include dashboard features as well.

We have been implementing the solution for customers since 2006.

It is quite a stable solution. I rate its stability as an eight.

We have 34 technical users and over 50 end users for the solution. I rate its scalability as an eight.

The solution's technical support team could respond faster.

Neutral

I have used Oracle in the past. In Comparison, IBM provides better performance and scalability features.

The solution's initial setup process has medium complexity. It takes a few days to complete. I rate the process as a seven.

I rate the solution as a seven.

We use it to manage a data warehouse for customers. The data warehouse is focused on marketing, commercial and sales data.

The performance of the solution is valuable.

The initial setup could be improved.

We have been using the solution for approximately five years.

The solution is stable.

The solution is scalable, and approximately 50 users in our organization are currently utilizing it.

We have had a good experience with customer service and support. I rate customer service and support a ten out of ten.

Positive

The initial setup is not easy but can be completed with the assistance of the IBM technicians. It took us about four to five months to complete deployment.

The licensing cost is charged annually. I rate it a ten out of ten.

I rate the solution a nine out of ten. The solution is good, but the initial setup can be improved.

We are a bank. The banking system uses IBM Db2 Database to save data in the database.

I have found the most valuable feature to be its availability. There is almost no downtime and the performance is very good.

I would like to see some artificial intelligence brought into the solution. Additionally, we need a way to gather some reporting information from the bank.

I have been working with IBM Db2 Database for a year now.

There are no real issues with the overall stability of IBM Db2 Database.

We do not have any problems with scalability. I would say give high marks for scalability.

Technical support is excellent. I would like to see better documentation. We have to speak to a support representative when we can not find the documentation on an issue we are facing.

From a performance perspective, I prefer SAP HANA for performance.

I would recommend IBM Db2 Database as a ten on a scale of one to ten. It is very powerful and responsive. 

Some customers use it for imaging databases, and others use it for ERP systems.

The most valuable features are the HADR, and it is so simple.

The backup solution lacks flexibility in some situations and could be improved. In addition, the management tools should be improved in the next release.

We have been using this solution for more than five years. We mostly use version 10.5 but sometimes use version 9.7.

It is a stable solution.

It is a scalable solution. 

I rate the technical support an eight out of ten. Our issue with the technical support isn't isolated to IBM Db2 Database, but it is an IBM policy. They try to solve problems remotely, but it is not the same as other products because it takes more time to solve.

The initial setup was easy. I rate the setup an eight out of ten.

The solution has annual licensing, and the costs are reasonable for the product. I rate the pricing a six out of ten.

I rate this solution a seven out of ten. I would recommend this product to customers. Most solutions have some environments requiring an enterprise database, so if a customer uses an IBM solution, the database should be Db2. Some customers may be using SQL Server, and if we have the solution for the Microsoft environment, we will recommend them to another database. But if the proposed solution is AIX or Unix system, we recommend they use the Db2 database on that platform. So it depends on the environment.

Db2 is mainly used for Core Banking Systems, credit card systems, and production systems for CBS collecting.

Db2's best features are that it's self-maintaining and self-monitoring, which means I have to view and monitor the database far less often.

There are some issues with Db2's database file system not being readable. The storage could also be increased, and the monitoring could be improved.

I've been using IMB Db2 Database for nine years.

There were a few hiccups directly after installation, but Db2 has been very stable since then.

Db2's scalability is very good, especially when used in the IBM power system.

The initial setup was very straightforward.

I would rate Db2 Database eight out of ten.