IBM Db2 Database Reviews

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.

We are using it for our SAP system.

Db2 Database has given us good results since we have started to use it. We predominantly use IBM hardware, and this is one of the reasons why we started to use Db2 Database. 

Db2 Database has a very good HADR capability. High availability resilience is also good in this solution. It also has pureScale, which allows you to upgrade one node to get very good and high-level resilience. If you are using a database on five nodes, you can take one node down, upgrade that, and let that node up. You can then bring the second node down, upgrade that, and so on.

The only drawback that we see in Db2 Database is the crash recovery. When there is a crash and somebody has to do the recovery, Db2 Database first stops, and then it does any crash recovery. In Oracle Database, crash recovery happens within the database. The database is not shut down.

I have been using this solution for five or six years.

Initially, there were hiccups, but now, it is a robust database. The only limitation that we have found is crash recovery. In terms of bugs, every database will have some bugs that will hit you. I don't see much in terms of bugs in Db2 Database. Whatever known bugs are there, we get those issues.

They are really very good. Overall, if I have to give a rating, I will give them an eight and a half or a nine out of ten. Their response to our requirements is quite good. They have good resources at the technical end. They take us very seriously. It might be because we are one of the largest accounts. I don't know what happens with medium-scale industries or small-scale industries. 

We migrated from Oracle Database to Db2 Database because it was quite a good and cost-effective solution. Oracle Database was coming out to be expensive.

The initial setup was complex altogether. It was complex because we were moving from Oracle Database to Db2 Database. A lot of code changes were required. 

We did not buy it. It came with our hardware without any complimentary maintenance. If I compare Db2 Database with Oracle Database, its price is lower than Oracle Database.

I would recommend Db2 Database to others because, as time passed, they have made a lot of changes, such as crash recovery. The time of crash recovery is reduced by almost 60% to 70%. Db2 Database also has Db2 BLU, which actually is in-memory. We have not explored this particular feature, but I would recommend others to explore it. With Db2 BLU, it becomes equivalent to HANA. We are seeing it being used a lot in large banks etc.

Among Oracle, Db2, and SQL databases, I would rate Oracle first, Db2 second, and SQL third. I personally believe Oracle is the most robust database. Db2 is the second robust database.

I would rate Db2 Database an eight out of ten.

The primary use for our Db2 database is for OLAP (Online Analytical Processing). Our department is using it for data warehousing and data analysis.  

We are deploying some of our enterprise systems to Azure. We would like to migrate data there and most of the systems will be running on the infrastructure as a service, so we will have lots of servers. Migrating data from Db2 becomes an important matter.  

Our target currently is to create the infrastructure which would include the servers, the backup solutions, the databases, application servers and whatever else we need.  

Db2 enables us to analyze big amounts of structured data in DataWarehouse solutions.

The feature that is one of the most valuable in Db2 is the DPF, or the Database Partitioning Feature that use Massive Parallel Processing architecture. We have deployments where one database is deployed on multiple physical servers. It is not exactly like RAC from Oracle. The purpose is not the availability but the performance and scalability of the DPF.  

Integration with other services could use some improvement. Currently, we are using Informatica ETL (Extract, Transform and Load) and the data is not loading as expected between the Db2 database and Informatica. Our goal is to eventually migrate the data to Azure servers and evaluate how it will perform. Currently, we are doing a POC (Proof of Concept) on this migration, but the second step cannot be completed without a dependable data load.  

We have been using Db2 for a long time. Maybe 15 years.  

DB2 is very scalable offering multichoice of possiblities - massive parallel processing and also  clustering.

We have technical support from IBM. If I had to evaluate their services, the quality really depends on the person that gets the ticket. There are some very good specialists on the technical support team and some that are not so good.  

If the ticket is critical, it will go to a queue and the IBM team will help you out very quickly and efficiently. Of course, sometimes critical problems are difficult and take some time to resolve.  

If I had to rate technical support overall, then I would give them about an eight-out-of-ten.  

We are a typical enterprise with the typical array of databases. Primarily we use Db2 and MS SQL, and some others. We have reporting tools like Business Objects, Power BI and Micro Strategy. We also have data warehouses. So we have ETL tools and then we need to have the backups, scheduling, and monitoring. We are using more than one database type for different reasons, so it is not exactly that we have switched away from something else to Db2.  

The initial setup is straightforward. I think that installing the Db2 is not that complex and it should not be a problem for a skilled DBA.  

Usually, we use our own team to maintain our products and we do not require outside services from vendors.  

As we have experience with a variety of database types any one of them could play into our architecture. I was hoping to have PaaS backup solution for the Db2 that we plan to deploy to Azure. But current plan is to back up the Db2 database to storage instead to some service in cloud. Doing it this way we would need to do a work-around and manage the backups by scripting and manage the retention and the sizes and disk drives. It is not optimal and it would be better if we could just send the backup to some kind of API or service in Azure and just configure it to back up images and files. In our testing, that is currently not working with Db2.  

I was looking for this kind of migration solution for the Db2 database, but I could not find it — which surprises me. I looked at the Tivoli Storage Manager, which supports the Db2 backups to the API, but they do not have that kind of PaaS service in Azure.

I have experience working with both Oracle and Db2. Comparing the two products, I would recommend Db2. Both Oracle and Db2 have some unique features that separate them. Although they are different, in comparing the two databases, they are both enterprise grade databases with lots of good features. But from my point of view, Db2 is much better.  

On a scale from one to ten where one is the worst and ten is the best, I would rate Db2 as an eight. It is not rated higher because I think that there are things that can be improved. It is currently not perfect. The graphical tools are not good. It is very common for GUI interfaces in IBM products to be lacking. For the first-time user who has no experience with it, the GUI will not seem very straightforward. If you had to work with it for four years, then you get used to it. But for the first-time users, it is not that user friendly.  

If some of the user-interface features can be enhanced, it could be a nine. Db2 is a good database. It is for structured data and there is always room for improvement. It requires an experienced person to handle it.  

The tool is not easy to use. It needs to improve scale computing so that the tool can be scaled vertically. The product needs to enhance pre-engine optimization and it needs to be more efficient in completing queries. The documentation should be updated to include different scenarios of deployment. 

I have been working with the product since 2015. 

The solution is stable. 

The tool doesn't work as a distributed database based on customer needs. 

The tool's support team is hard to reach. 

Positive

I have also worked with Microsoft SQL server. This product is easy to use. It is also smarter in optimizing the queries. Microsoft SQL serves is also easy to maintain on the operations side when compared to IBM Db2. 

The tool's time length for deployment depends on the design and can take around two days to three weeks to complete. 

I recommend the product to medium enterprises. I would rate the solution a seven out of ten. 

We use the solution as a query tool for requesting and updating data.

The solution has the best querying features.

They should make the process of building up queries easier for the solution.

I have been using the solution for some years.

It is a stable solution. I rate its stability nine out of ten.

Presently, we have 200 solution users in our organization.

The solution's technical support team is good.

The solution's initial setup is straightforward. The deployment process involves requesting access to different test environments and productions. It takes a couple of hours to complete.

We implemented the solution in-house.

The solution is intuitive and easy to use once you know how to build up queries. I rate it a nine out of ten.

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.

My main use of Db2 is as an additional data source for integration or a source for integration adapters.

The most valuable features are the simplicity of the database and the access to Db2 and Db2 information.

I've been working with this solution for twenty years.

Db2 is stable and reliable.

IBM's technical support is good, it's an excellent reason to purchase Db2.

The initial setup was quick and easy.

IBM's products tend to be quite costly, especially given the availability of free, open-source alternatives.

I would rate Db2 eight out of ten.

We are partners with IBM and I'm for implementing Power systems with DB2 in this company. 

We propose DB2 and other IBM products to our customers.

As with all IBM products, I like the reliability of this solution. Db2 is a robust relational database with great features. 

If you're already an IBM Customer or you use IBM products, you know they're powerful products.

 IBM recently purchased Red Hat and things are working more smoothly since then, there's more integration.

I think they need to improve the GUI and I'd like to see more integration with other platforms. 

If you have a project involving several platforms or databases it's the integration with other products that's crucial. Db2 has this capability but sometimes there are issues and you have to contact support to get things fixed. 

They haven't done extensive testing with integration; they'll often send you to third parties. It often means that you have to purchase additional products in order to integrate with other platforms and that's an additional cost. 

I've been using this solution for over 20 years. 

The solution is stable. 

The solution is very scalable. IBM has a mid-range and a mainframe system, so every product is made with scalability in mind. 

Their main target is medium and large size business so they're not interested in small business. 

The initial setup is very easy. 

There is an issue with IBM licenses pricing which is expensive, and it's the main downside of buying IBM products or databases.

I rate this solution an eight out of 10. 

The solution is used for database management.

The solution has very good data compression of up to 50%. For example, if you have 50 terabytes of data, it can be reduced to 25 terabytes.

The capabilities of this solution could improve.

I have been using this solution for many years.

In my experience, it has been stable.

The scalability is good. We have some clients that have over 9,000 users using this solution.

The technical support has been very friendly, responsive, and it is quick to escalate an issue.

I have used previously Cisco MySQL, SQL Server, SAP HANNA, and IBM DB2.

We have approximately 14 technicians doing the deployment and maintenance of this solution.

We normally handle large size businesses and as far as I am aware, the license is negotiable based on the number of users and the quantitative data.

I would recommend this solution to others.

I rate IBM Db2 Database an eight out of ten.

We use the solution as a database that connects to some legacy mainframe systems.

The solution is a very stable relational database and has integration with legacy systems. It is a great product.

The solution could be more modern and have updated database technology. This would allow it to work with modern applications a lot more seamlessly. You will find that there are other better-suited databases where you can deal with more modern type applications.

In the future, they can improve by being closely aligned with the next generation of application that are arriving or that will be developed.

I have been using the solution for a couple of years.

I have found the solution to be scalable.

In my experience, the solution is able to be scaled vertically, but not horizontally. Everyone is using the solution in our organization.

The support we have received has been good. However, the support in South Africa has not been as good.

The installation on our side is automated, we can have a database up and ready within a day. Since we have started using automation, the installation has been very easy.

We did the deployment internally and it was not difficult but it could be for someone that is not familiar with the solution. We have eight technicians doing the deployment and maintenance of the solution.

There is a license for this solution and we pay every three years.

I would recommend this solution to others if they have the proper application, otherwise, it might not fulfil their needs. We plan on using the solution in the future.

I rate IBM Db2 Database a seven out of ten.