DB2 is a family of relational database software solutions offered by IBM. It includes standard Db2 and Db2 Warehouse editions, either deployable on-cloud, or on-premise.
$0
EDB Postgres Advanced Server
Score 10.0 out of 10
N/A
The EDB Postgres Advanced Server is an advanced deployment of the PostgreSQL relational database with greater features and Oracle compatibility, from EnterpriseDB headquartered in Bedford, Massachusetts.
N/A
PostgreSQL
Score 8.7 out of 10
N/A
PostgreSQL (alternately Postgres) is a free and open source object-relational database system boasting over 30 years of active development, reliability, feature robustness, and performance. It supports SQL and is designed to support various workloads flexibly.
N/A
Pricing
Db2
EDB Postgres Advanced Server
PostgreSQL
Editions & Modules
Db2 on Cloud Lite
$0
Db2 on Cloud Standard
$99
per month
Db2 Warehouse on Cloud Flex One
$898
per month
Db2 on Cloud Enterprise
$946
per month
Db2 Warehouse on Cloud Flex for AWS
2,957
per month
Db2 Warehouse on Cloud Flex
$3,451
per month
Db2 Warehouse on Cloud Flex Performance
13,651
per month
Db2 Warehouse on Cloud Flex Performance for AWS
13,651
per month
Db2 Standard Edition
Contact Sales
Db2 Advanced Edition
Contact Sales
No answers on this topic
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Db2
EDB Postgres Advanced Server
PostgreSQL
Free Trial
Yes
No
No
Free/Freemium Version
Yes
No
No
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
Yes
No
No
Entry-level Setup Fee
Optional
No setup fee
No setup fee
Additional Details
—
—
—
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Db2
EDB Postgres Advanced Server
PostgreSQL
Considered Multiple Products
Db2
Verified User
Project Manager
Chose Db2
Oracle and Microsoft are the ones that we have more to compare with and they are on par with Db2. postgres is the small solution that usually we leave behind and move to Db2. Mongo is the one that is different from what I used Db2 for but I know it has the capability to use …
We are underway to evaluate both, in their benefits versus concerns. One thing that makes IBM Db2 better is it is a very mature database with great performance
It is faster and the transactions are much more safer and reliable if I compare it with the two SQL database I mentioned above, as far as MongoDB is concerned it completely depends upon the requirement of the project, if a SQL or a NoSQL database is more suitable for a project.
Db2 provides a combination of performance and scalability. Security wise, Db2 is always a first choice, especially for the systems where security can't be compromised. For mainframe systems, there is no other DB in the market that can perform better than Db2. If an organization …
Db2 has overall stronger capabilities with data maintenance, governance and task scheduling, however Teradata has a more developed online community with more robust and timely customer support. The support and training capabilities and the user community where you can interact …
Compared to similar products, Db2 shared common Relational DataBase Management System (RDBMS) features such as SQL support, data integrity, Atomicity, Consistency, Isolation and Durability (ACID) Compliance and concurrency control. However, the Db2 is designed for scalability, …
Db2 is one of the oldest and mature rdbms available in the market. IBM products were already been used in the organization. Cost effective in terms of licensing.
We are working for our product , where we were using different database but that database was not fast our work So we switch to IBM Db2 for better result.
Verified User
Analyst
Chose Db2
DB2 was more scalable and easily configurable than other products we evaluated and short listed in terms of functionality and pricing. IBM also had a good demo on premise and provided us a sandbox experience to test out and play with the product and DB2 at that time came out …
It's almost not comparable because they all do the same job in varying degrees. There are some things I like about Db2 that I don't enjoy about Oracle, but it mostly comes down to how it works and where it stores everything like SYS tables in Db2. MySQL is probably the fastest …
Price aspect is good with DB2, db2 Blu as was disappointing it couldn't compete with IQ. pureScale was disappointing and couldn't compete with Oracle RAC. Pros of using db2 is that it is admin friendly. Also it has a lot of flexibility with memory management which other RDMs …
PPAS proved better for our customer's data-centric apps than Oracle in all but a few edge cases (encryption at rest and multi-TB database-tier backups) because it is simpler to install/maintain, runs nearly all Oracle-syntax SQL as well as ANSI SQL. PPAS has much more JSON …
PostgreSQL works better than MySQL for analytics workflows where a massively parallel processing database architecture is necessary. We used PostgreSQL because it allows better scalability for querying and data analysis compared to the transactional database MySQL that we use.
I have primarily used it as the basis for a SIS - but I have migrated more than a few systems from there database systems to DB2 (Filemaker, MySQL, etc.). DB2 does have a better structural approach, as opposed to Filemaker, which allows for more data consistency, but this can also lead to an inflexibility that can sometimes be counterintuitive when attempting to compensate for the flexibility of the work environment as Schools tend to have an all in one approach.
It's great if you are using or wish to use PostgreSQL and need the added performance optimization, security features and developer and DBA tools. If you need compatibility with Oracle it's a must-have. There are many developer features that greatly assist dev teams in integrating and implementing complex middleware. It's great for optimizing complex database queries as well as for scaling. I would recommend Postgres Plus Advanced Server for any software development team that is hitting the limit of what PostgreSQL is capable of and wants to improve performance, security, and gain extra developer tools.
PostgreSQL is best used for structured data, and best when following relational database design principles. I would not use PostgreSQL for large unstructured data such as video, images, sound files, xml documents, web-pages, especially if these files have their own highly variable, internal structure.
PPAS Oracle compatibility, especially the PL/SQL syntax, has made migrating database-tier code very simple. Most Oracle packages do not need to be changed at all and those that do are generally for simple reasons like a reserved word in PPAS that is allowed in Oracle.
PPAS xDB, the multi-master replication tool, is simple and - most important - does not break with network or other interruptions. We have been able to configure and forget, which our customers could never do with other multi-master tools.
Most people had no idea that PPAS and PostgreSQL have full CRUD support for JSON. They think you need a specialized product and/or that JSON is read-only. Every organization that I have worked with is evaluating adding JSON to their relational model.
Documentation is excellent but spread out across many resources and can take a while to wade through—would benefit from having more intro level, getting started guides for various languages.
Ruby support is excellent but more Ruby examples and beginner-level documentation would be nice.
It is sometimes hard to find a community of users on StackOverflow so a larger community, and a dedicated forum with active members to answer questions and work through issues would be nice.
The DB2 database is a solid option for our school. We have been on this journey now for 3-4 years so we are still adapting to what it can do. We will renew our use of DB2 because we don’t see. Major need to change. Also, changing a main database in a school environment is a major project, so we’ll avoid that if possible.
You have to be well versed in using the technology, not only from a GUI interface but from a command line interface to successfully use this software to its fullest.
Postgresql is the best tool out there for relational data so I have to give it a high rating when it comes to analytics, data availability and consistency, so on and so forth. SQL is also a relatively consistent language so when it comes to building new tables and loading data in from the OLTP database, there are enough tools where we can perform ETL on a scalable basis.
I have never had DB2 go down unexpectedly. It just works solidly every day. When I look at the logs, sometimes DB2 has figured out there was a need to build an index. Instead of waiting for me to do it, the database automatically created the index for me. At my current company, we have had zero issues for the past 8 years. We have upgrade the server 3 times and upgraded the OS each time and the only thing we saw was that DB2 got better and faster. It is simply amazing.
The performances are exceptional if you take care to maintain the database. It is a very powerful tool and at the same time very easy to use. In our installation, we expect a DB machine on the mainframe with access to the database through ODBC connectors directly from branch servers, with fabulous end users experience.
The data queries are relatively quick for a small to medium sized table. With complex joins, and a wide and deep table however, the performance of the query has room for improvement.
Easily the best product support team. :) Whenever we have questions, they have answered those in a timely manner and we like how they go above and beyond to help.
There are several companies that you can contract for technical support, like EnterpriseDB or Percona, both first level in expertise and commitment to the software.
But we do not have contracts with them, we have done all the way from googling to forums, and never have a problem that we cannot resolve or pass around. And for dozens of projects and more than 15 years now.
The online training is request based. Had there been recorded videos available online for potential users to benefit from, I could have rated it higher. The online documentation however is very helpful. The online documentation PDF is downloadable and allows users to pace their own learning. With examples and code snippets, the documentation is great starting point.
DB2 was more scalable and easily configurable than other products we evaluated and short listed in terms of functionality and pricing. IBM also had a good demo on premise and provided us a sandbox experience to test out and play with the product and DB2 at that time came out better than other similar products.
PPAS proved better for our customer's data-centric apps than Oracle in all but a few edge cases (encryption at rest and multi-TB database-tier backups) because it is simpler to install/maintain, runs nearly all Oracle-syntax SQL as well as ANSI SQL. PPAS has much more JSON capabilities (full CRUD vs. read-only in Oracle), simpler geospatial, simpler / more stable replication and datatypes that match developer expectations, such as BOOLEAN and ENUMs.
Although the competition between the different databases is increasingly aggressive in the sense that they provide many improvements, new functionalities, compatibility with complementary components or environments, in some cases it requires that it be followed within the same family of applications that performs the company that develops it and that is not all bad, but being able to adapt or configure different programs, applications or other environments developed by third parties apart is what gives PostgreSQL a certain advantage and this diversification in the components that can be joined with it, is the reason why it is a great option to choose.
By using DB2 only to support my IzPCA activities, my knowledge here is somewhat limited.
Anyway, from what I was able to understand, DB2 is extremely scallable.
Maybe the information below could serve as an example of scalability.
Customer have an huge mainframe environment, 13x z15 CECs, around 80 LPARs, and maybe more than 50 Sysplexes (I am not totally sure about this last figure...)
Today we have 7 IzPCA databases, each one in a distinct Syplex.
Plans are underway to have, at the end, an small LPAR, with only one DB2 sub-system, and with only one database, then transmit the data from a lot of other LPARs, and then process all the data in this only one database.
The IzPCA collect process (read the data received, manipulate it, and insert rows in the tables) today is a huge process, demanding many elapsed hours, and lots of CPU.
Almost 100% of the tables are PBR type, insert jobs run in parallel, but in 4 of the 7 database, it is a really a huge and long process.
Combining the INSERTs loads from the 7 databases in only one will be impossible.......,,,,
But, IzPCA recently introduced a new feature, called "Continuous Collector".
By using that feature, small amounts of data will be transmited to the central LPAR at every 5 minutes (or even less), processed immediately,in a short period of time, and withsmall use of CPU, instead of one or two transmissions by day, of very large amounts of data and the corresponding collect jobs occurring only once or twice a day, with long elapsed times, and huge comsumption of CPU
I suspect the total CPU seconds consumed will be more or less the same in both cases, but in the new method it will occur insmall bursts many times a day!!
Postgres Plus Advanced Server is quite complex and may take longer to implement certain things than simply using PostgreSQL depending on developer familiarity with the platform.
Getting up to speed can be daunting so again, there is an upfront cost in time spent learning the platform, besides the potential for extra time spent on a feature-by-feature basis.
The cost of Postgres Plus Advanced Server should be weighed against simply using PostgreSQL to decide which is the best solution for your business needs.
Easy to administer so our DevOps team has only ever used minimal time to setup, tune, and maintain.
Easy to interface with so our Engineering team has only ever used minimal time to query or modify the database. Getting the data is straightforward, what we do with it is the bigger concern.