IBM Db2 Database Reviews

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.  

In terms of improvements, IBM Db2 can improve its interface and its functionality. Also, the embedded functions should be much richer than the current ones - the functions which are embedded in the engine itself.

For example, I can find more DEPTH functions in Oracle than in Db2. Also, SQL Server still has richer functions than Db2.

I'm working with Db2 for two years now, since we migrated to the Cloud and converted from the SQL Server.

I work with Db2, SQL Server, and Oracle.

I'm a specialist in the product, doing support. I received special training for it.

In terms of stability, I have some issues, but I cannot figure out if this is due to the database or the platform in the engine itself.

Additionally, sometimes I find the response is not good, meaning a reasonable response time. For a while the team was working fine in another engine. What I look for is the design and whether the syntax is different. I don't know. I'm really not certain about the holes.

Since it's on the Cloud, it's pretty much scalable with no limits.

We did get a specialist to help with the setup and deployment to the Cloud.

IBM Db2 was much cheaper as a package than using other products. This is because IBM supplied a package with its product. It's an application. So it was much more efficient and a stronger competitor in that regard.

Performance-wise, Oracle is the best solution. It is much more reliable. Regarding the end user administration and the functions available, SQL Server is much easier.

They have much more user-friendly interfaces. Regarding Db2, I'm a little bit in doubt. I don't see that it is significantly different when I went from SQL Server to Db2. I have not seen any significant improvements or changes.

The advice I would give is to have a good administrator. Have an administrator that is skilled in that field so he can tune the database's performance and understand the know-how of how to administrate that platform.

Overall, I would give IBM Db2 a 7 out of 10. 

For it to be higher, it needs a better interface. It is very important to have. I am very keen to have such an interface.

I used DB2 two years ago. It's a data warehouse project solution for a bank. I use DB2 as a warehouse and the data stacks for the APL.

My role in this project was as a database designer. I would design the database, the warehouse, and get the requirements. 

I am not detailed in the technicality of creating the table in DB2.

I am now selling this product.

The most valuable feature is data analytics.

The price should be lower.

I have been working with this solution for six months.

I use the DB2 BLU version.

This solution is stable. It's good.

I don't' have any knowledge about scalability.

The technical support is good. They have presales and technical support. When you submit a ticket the response time is quick.

Previously we were using SQL Server.

The main difference is the pricing and implementation.

The initial setup was straightforward.

It took four months to deploy this solution.

I only use one server to implement the solution.

I think that everyone knows that with IBM the standard price is higher than the others.

There is a lot of documentation available. I was, however, able to find what I needed through Google.

For our clients who have a large scale enterprise, we suggest DB2 and mid-scale enterprise customers we suggest SQL Server or others.

It's a better solution, it's better on the application. The purpose of DB2 is for a data warehouse or with data analytics.

I would rate this product an eight out of ten.

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.

I handle implementation. I install the Db2 Database before I send it to the developer or the application team. Also, sometimes, I have to migrate the database from one platform to another.

The solution is easy to install and simple to maintain. The most valuable aspect of the solution is its general user-friendliness for users of all kinds.

The solution could improve the centralization aspect of the tools.

It would be ideal if the solution offered backup functionality. Many similar tools already do, which means Db2 is somewhat behind the curve in terms of what a customer might expect from it.

I'm an implementer of the solution in Thailand. I have been working with Oracle Db2 and SQL for more than 10 years. 

The solution is stable so long as you don't have to make any changes to it. I haven't seen any bugs, or glitches on it. I haven't experienced crashes either.

The solution is quite scalable. A company shouldn't have issues with expanding it if they need to.

We typically implement the solution for small to medium-sized organizations.

Technical support is not the best. I would rate them five out of ten. 

The issue is that in order to make a ticket, you may have to call and then you end up being on hold. Sometimes, the person who answers doesn't know how to resolve your issues so it can be frustrating. 

I also have experience with Oracle databases. I find Oracle to be a bit better than Db2 if I'm honest. They have a lot of functionality, for example, and can handle backup and recovery of data. This is not possible on Db2.

The solution is very easy to set up. It's not complex at all.

Deployment takes about one to two hours or so. It's not a long or arduous process by any means. 

You only need one person to deploy and maintain it.

I handle the implementation myself.

I don't know too much about the pricing of the solution. There may be extra fees on top of just the licensing fee. I'm not sure.

I'm looking at other databases right now. I'd prefer something with a backup functionality, which Db2 lacks.

We're currently IBM partners. 

I use the solution extensively. 

I'd like other companies to know it's quite easy to set up and maintain. If they are looking for something fairly easy to jump into, this may be it.

I'd rate the solution seven out of ten.

We are not using this with other users, it is dedicated to our backup solution.

We only have one instance, one user, one service, and we don't have any other users or clients that we connect to.

A database system is a tool used for reporting and to monitor if it is running or if there are any issues. We can set alarms and warnings. It is a backup system that manages the backup.

The most valuable feature is that it is robust. We had a crash of the backup system and the IBM DB2 was always up and consistent. It's robust, and for us, it was always up and running.

The database is deployed using the command line, so we did not test any other tools, aside from DB2 using the command line interface.

Because this solution is a big data database only dedicated to the application server, it is very difficult for us to assess areas of improvement. We use the database, so we don't have any other requirements or need to use it in any other way.

The licensing fees can be reduced. While we don't see the breakdown, we know that IBM licenses for the backup system are very expensive.

I have been working with this solution for ten years.

This solution is stable.

We don't have experience with scalability because the server is also a dedicated server and the physical hardware has always been dedicated from the beginning. After five years, we made a technical upgrade and have been the same since.

My colleague has the primary responsibility for the backup system and he has had to open tickets on two occasions. Each time, they were okay and the issue was resolved. 

The initial setup is simple and straightforward. It's easy to install with no special configuration for a big data database. They make things simple.

It took less than an hour to deploy.

The cost is embedded in the price of the backup solution. We know that the backup solution is quite expensive and with each inside license, there is also a database license.

We don't see what the specific price of the DB2 license is because we pay for the backup license as a package.

This is a robust and stable product but it's expensive.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

The solution is a major central relational database management system that maintains all of the data for our bank's core business.

The availability, reliability, consistency, security, performance, and methodology of the solution are all excellent. It's a proven product for many, many businesses in many, many different areas. It's probably one of the best products on the market.

The self-management and optimization features are probably the best on the market.

The ease of use, or ease of management, could be improved.

There are many improvements all the time on the solution. There is no one thing that I would mention. IBM invests a lot of money to improve the tool and maintain it. There are improvements all the time happening in different areas. 

I've worked with IBM products since 1989.

The solution is stable. No technical issues have ever occured.

Technical support is good.

The initial setup is quite complex. Nothing is simple on the platform. Deployment times depend on the extent of the organization. Different tests need to be done: unique tests, integration tests, user acceptance, performance, etc.

There are specialists on-premises that work for the bank and they handle everything themselves.

We use the on-premises deployment model.

The solution is suitable for big organizations, big financial institutions, government, ministries, the army, insurance companies, etc. It's not for small end-users.

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten.

The learning curve for the Db2 specialist is high. To become a specialist, under production level, takes two years. It's a complex product.

We primarily use the solution for different banking systems.

The solution is very stable, in both hardware and database.

IBM just came out with new hardware in September, so they are getting ready for the cloud. If they can push through with all those features they're talking about, I think they have a good product lined up. Right now, the solution needs to have end-to-end encryption, to be cloud-ready, to have native support for Linux, and built-in data scientist workbenches. These are promised to us in the new release, and I hope that happens.

End-to-end encryption specifically is something the solution needs to have in the next release.

The solution is very stable.

The solution is very scalable. We don't plan on increasing usage any time soon, however.

Technical support is good. they are pretty responsive.

We also use SAP HANA. These are two different applications, however, and they have different use cases. HANA runs on memory. Db2 is a much more mature, older technology with its own platform. HANA is not that new but it's not that old either. It's much faster for sure. The difference is one is in-memory computing, while the other is a traditional database on hardware on the IBM platform.

The setup is quite complex. The solution and the hardware build are two different events. The deployment itself doesn't take more than two weeks, followed by the setup which can take, depending on the organization and its processes, a few months to a year. It varies from client to client.

IBM assisted us with the deployment. 

They're quite good at what they do. They never deliver on time or on budget. However, they know what they're doing, as it's their product.

The solution is pretty expensive and IBM isn't very transparent in their pricing plans. You need to be aware of what your company specifically needs before purchasing anything.

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