What needs improvement with IBM Db2 Database?

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

IBM's support isn't as strong as it used to be, especially when it comes to providing fixes. We have to keep track of defects more closely now. When a defect is identified, IBM takes it to their lab, creates an APAR, and provides us with a fix. We receive these fixes periodically and apply them to our Db2 code in a sandbox environment first, not directly into production. We test thoroughly before rolling it out to development and eventually to production. Recently, we've encountered some issues with Db2, requiring us to be extra cautious to avoid outages. Unfortunately, we did experience an outage in February due to a code defect. We recently received a Red Alert from IBM, a critical warning in the mainframe world indicating a potential risk of data loss if not addressed.

They could enhance the product's cloud integration and general-purpose database capabilities to better compete with solutions like Oracle and Microsoft SQL Server.

The data table names are very short which is not user friendly compared to the Oracle SQL server. It should have longer column and table names.

The TSA version of IBM Db2 Database doesn't meet my stability expectations. Every time when a switch over occurs, some stability issues can be noticed. The vendor should offer a free version of IBM Db2 Database. For instance, if our company wants to train new individuals on all the features of IBM Db2 Database, they can only be trained after purchasing the paid version of the solution. About ten years ago, a trial version was available for the solution that was highly beneficial for companies. The vendor can add AI or ML features in the future version of IBM Db2 Database.

Db2 interface could be improved a bit. Comparing it to Oracle, Db2's interfaces could be improved.

IBM Db2 Database is not a commodity product compatible with hyperscalers. IBM Db2 Database needs to work more on compatibility with other platforms. Considering the competitors of IBM Db2 Database, I would say that the tool has to be made more cloud-friendly and should have agreements with AWS, Microsoft, or Google to run things on hyperscalers. In general, I would want the tool to have a bit more openings around cloud solutions rather than only being available on-premises.

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.

When we enable audits on our database, there is a server overload. The product needs to improve its configuration and storage.

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

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.

IBM Db2 Database could improve in the steps it takes for upgrades. It is not an easy process. The process of upgrading the version is lengthy and requires a lot of time. To make it more efficient, I suggest implementing some automation on the solution side. This will greatly reduce the time required for the upgrade. In the logging section, we can observe that we have two designated areas for secondary logs and logging. This is vastly different from the HANA database where lock identification and prompt action-taking are possible due to the instant notification feature. In our case, we have to manually create a query for the same result. However, in HANA, an alert ID is provided automatically. The same feature should be implemented here for the purpose of alerting.

We need some time to improve the performance. We have to perform a weekly REORG, or else RUNSTATS for the databases. In Oracle's 19.1 version, there are many ways to automate things. However, in the case of Db2, we have less scope. As of now, my understanding is they have a separate tool called Pacemaker. It's similar to the HADR, TSA, which is Tivoli System Automation. The initial setup is difficult. In terms of OS-level information, we won't be able to capture database entries. There are bugs. If the bugs are fixed in that, it'll be easier. Whenever there is an OS-level error or the logs are attached to the database, we have to reach out to the OS team to get the information.

The initial setup could be improved.

IBM Db2 Database could improve with better security.

Hardware and support subscriptions are very expensive. Better partnerships in the Middle East or Egypt could reduce costs. The solution no longer supports POWER8.

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

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.

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.

Microsoft SQL Server is comparatively very simple to use. I wish IBM would move towards making Db2 easy to use for both basic and advanced users. This is where I see room for advancement. Db2 is also more expensive than Microsoft SQL Server, and its price can be reduced. The replication feature needs to be there in Db2. Microsoft provides similar functionality in SQL Server. IBM also has similar functionality, but it exists in a different product. So, to have the replication ability, you have to buy a different product. It makes sense to have this functionality within Db2 instead of a different product. It will also be helpful in terms of competition. In Africa, the problem for Db2 is competition. Oracle Database and Microsoft SQL Server have been in this market for a very long time. These companies have built the ecosystem and the brand within this market for a very long time. So, they are very popular with users. Db2 or IBM came a little later in the game, and that's where the problem lies. They also don't do a lot of marketing for it, which is also a problem.

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.

IBM Db2 Database could improve the user-defined functions. There are some user-defined functions that are missing, such as the spring functions. I used to have Teradata for my projects and I was used to working in the environment. They had a good set of user-defined functions. In a future release of the IBM Db2 Database, it could be helpful to have SQL assistance. Teradata had this feature and it was very useful to connect to warehouses.

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.

The management of Db2 should be simplified because there are not too many specialists in this area, and the learning curve of Db2 specialists is very long. After the courses, probably it takes one and a half or two years to get to the point when you are using the product properly in the production systems. So, the complexity is very high, and the most important thing is to simplify the management of the product, including self-maintenance. They should simplify the installation, management, and monitoring to simplify the product. It takes too long for a person to be a specialist in this product. The price should also be adjusted a little bit. IBM is quite expensive with respect to the product.

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.

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.

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.

The good thing is that there are improvements coming with later function levels for the z/OS Db2. I'd like it if, with the operating system that we've got, z/OS, on the mainframe, it would allow us to refresh the hardware to run Linux dockers on the mainframe. This means this might give us opportunities for different ways of coming into the Db2 environment in the future. We just want a bit more integration with Linux. That said, we are already seeing Linux more readily available on the mainframe environment. Not only have we got the premium operating systems on OS. We can run LPARs on the same mainframe footprint that is also supporting Linux. This is what has improved and made the mainframe environment more competitive. We're also looking at AI for Db2 as well, and machine learning for the future. We know that AI has come out, that we're going to get that, and we're going to evaluate that product next year for Db2. That said, I haven't got any real complaints about Db2 on the mainframe. For the most part, a lot of the problems we have nowadays are to do with communication between the various teams that you would class as stakeholders.

The solution could improve by providing more integration.

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 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.

The capabilities of this solution could improve.

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.

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.

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.

Performance is something that can be improved with DB2. We have had issues with respect to scalability. The usability can be simplified.

We need to have a cloud-based version of this database. It would be helpful to have a hybrid data storage facility that includes NoSQL technologies.

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.

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.

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.

The price should be lower.

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.

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.

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.

We would like to see a web-based interface for this solution, as it would help to improve visibility. It would be helpful to have more querying tools and more development tools for us to work easily with Microsoft. For example, ODBC drivers would make work easier for our development team.

I don't have a general opinion about how they can improve this product. The performance could be improved.

I would like to see better support for advanced analytics.

It would be nice if it was easily available on all platforms because nowadays, it is not there as a general database.