IBM Db2 Database Reviews

The primary use case of the IBM Db2 Database is our trading platform.

We use store procedures and SQL. 

We have some tables with partitions, as well as some tables with a large amount of data. 

We use partitions, we use views, and we know who uses them.

We don't have any compatibility issues because we use all IBM products. We use every IBM product. That is why we use IBM's developer tool as well. We never encounter any product compatibility issues during development and deployment.

That is one of the good things that happened to us, in my opinion.

When we had server-related issues, such as a database outage, compatibility and support were good. I believe that because the support is good, they jump in and assist us in determining the root cause. 

The product is really reliable. 

We have seen very few instances of problems, overall IBM products are valuable.

The most valuable features are compatibility and support. 

I am currently moving away from that core application. I am not focusing on the solution. 

It is our trading application, and there are some reservations, about continuing to upgrade to the latest versions even though we are currently running on older versions. I believe the first step would be to upgrade it to the most recent versions and then see if any improvements are required while continuing to provide feedback on older versions.

The pricing could be improved, it's expensive.

I am not working on it as closely these days, but our application began in 2001, and we have been using the IBM Db2 database since then.

IBM products are very nice and perform very well.

IBM Db2 Database is a stable product.

We use a scalable WebSphere Application Server topology, but it's a monolithic application that can only be scaled vertically, not horizontally, because it's a monolithic single database, but those limitations exist. But there are times when I believe we are pleased with the product.

We have multiple production environments and various resources, as well as separate teams to manage the database and separate teams to manage the Application Server. I believe it began with a small team, but as time passed, I believe the number of environments and teams increased. Teams are popular now. I believe we have teams dedicated to each area.

I can say that there are approximately 100 developers, both offshore and onshore.

We have support. In my opinion, they are prompt, we receive responses from IBM within two to three hours. 

There are some challenges. There may be one or two instances where it exceeds, but we are content with that.

The product is very reliable and stable, and we used to receive prompt responses from IBM on support. 

Previously, we were using the WebSphere Application Server. Those applications are in maintenance mode.

We also worked with the Application Developer,m which is the Rational Application Developer for WebSphere software. It is running on legacy Java version 8.

No one is currently using this software because everyone has upgraded to the latest version, but our application is still running with an older version. I don't believe anyone is currently using the older version of Java and the Application Developer that we are.

It's an older version of Java, and I don't believe any developmental improvements will be made to the tool as of now. Because we are not using the most recent version of the tool and the most recent version of the WebSphere Application Server, the feedback I could provide may be ineffective.

We are in the process of migrating to the AWS Cloud.

Our design approach is to convert our monolithic applications to microservices.

We have not used Hadoop, High-Availability Clustering, or Backup and Recovery, we only use the Application Server to host our applications.

The monolithic application is hosted on-premises.

We installed the system in 2001 and have been using it ever since.

The maintenance and support staff is quite small. We have a dedicated database team, we can support multiple database products in addition to Db2.

I am aware that IBM pricing is expensive in comparison to other products. 

However, I am not the person who dealt with pricing.

It is expensive when compared to other products.

We are moving away from IBM products.

Everyone is now gravitating toward AWS and cloud computing. And this is a legacy monolithic platform. My advice will be ineffective. The legacy system was designed in the year 2000.

When we first launched our product, IBM hosted our client platform.

Our client insisted on using IBM products, but I believe we are now satisfied. However, the company where we started, has now been acquired by four different companies.

We are working on a different company that has Java-based products, department-based products, and many other products. It's obvious it's a trade. We will build a trading platform on which our clients and sponsors will trade.

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

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 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 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. 

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.

It's shipped with another software IBM product called Maximo. I'm using it just as an underline. It is a typical database. I use it as a database container.  

The setup process has become much easier recently. 

It is quite stable.

The solution can scale well. 

I am not heavy into developing in Db2. All my development is in the application itself, not in the Db2. Therefore, it's hard to think about areas it needs to improve in. 

The user interface is not user-friendly. There's a converter tool that is much easier for us in comparison. 

We would like the product to have tutorials and answers to questions and troubleshooting to be easier to find online. It's hard to find the answers you're looking for. 

I need data replication to be much more efficient than what is available in the current version. 

I've used the solution for around three years now. 

The solution is stable. Even if there are a large number of records, the performance stays the same. There are no bugs or glitches and it doesn't crash or freeze. 

We have found the solution to be scalable. If you want to expand it, you can. 

We don't really have individual users. It comes as part of a package and therefore it's hard to say who is using it and who isn't. 

They need better support and better online resources. If I try to Google something to troubleshoot, I cannot find an accessible answer. 

Neutral

The initial setup has recently become easier and more straightforward. A lot of enhancements have happened here. Still, it is a bit complex. 

I am not paying the license for it individually. It's included in the package.

That said, the cost in general could be more reasonable for the package as a whole. 

We did look at other options and found them to be more reasonably priced. 

I'd recommend the solution to others. However, I'd recommend other potential users try to find a cheaper option. I'd rate it overall at a seven out of ten. 

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.