Db2 vs. FileMaker Pro

The company has been using it for many years and I have been using it for just over 2 years. I feel the ease in obtaining the data. The solution can fit scenarios where there is quite a high workload and a low response time. Queries and transactions occur in milliseconds. Other backup/restore, replication and other features are fundamental and work exceptionally well. IBM is one of the most reliable companies and has been in the market for years in this segment and has helped us with support whenever we need it.

If your company is really small, I can understand the need for a product like this. However, I would go for MS Access... FileMaker Pro can not be integrated with other systems (like MS Access can at least be handled by C# for instance, and can be integrated with MS Excel or even SQL server). I'm really not sure in what scenario one would choose for FileMaker Pro. If your application or company grows bigger, you're going to have a problem to move to another environment. Also, the fact that only one person can work with the backend at any given time is a problem in a somewhat larger company.

• DB2 maintains itself very well. The Task Scheduler component of DB2 allows for statistics gathering and reorganization of indexes and tables without user interaction or without specific knowledge of cron or Windows Task Scheduler / Scheduled jobs.
• Its use of ASYNC, NEARSYNC, and SYNC HADR (High Availability Disaster Recovery ) models gives you a range of options for maintaining a very high uptime ratio. Failover from PRIMARY to SECONDARY becomes very easy with just a single command or windowed mouse click.
• Task Scheduler ( DB2 9.7 and earlier ) allows for jobs to be run within other jobs, and exit and error codes can define what other jobs are run. This allows for ease of maintenance without third party softwares.
• Tablespace usage and automatic storage help keep your data segmented while at rest, making partitioning easier.
• Ability to run commands via CLI (Command Line Interface) or via Control Center / Data Studio ( DB2 10.x+) makes administration a breeze.

• The relational database management system makes the program highly customizable to fit the needs of any product. You can add a ton of information to each record and update your inventory on a regular basis with an Excel import or manually inside of the record. It has the capability to incorporate barcoding, which can manage your available inventory with ease.
• The scripting language allows FileMaker to automatically calculate complex algorithms automatically or generate report outs with the click of a button. This allows for greater UI, especially with active users who are not familiar with writing code. Almost all of our internal data is linked to the FileMaker database
• The server license allows many users to update the database in real time, which is handy if your inventory is constantly changing. We have users with Macs, PCs, iPhones and handheld tablets linked to our FileMaker database and they are updating the information constantly throughout the day.
• If you invest some time into formatting and scripting the database, there is a high ease of use for users without knowledge of any programming or FileMaker itself.

• The relational model requires a rigid schema that does not necessarily fit with some types of modern development.
• Proprietary database, requires a lot of Hardware for its good performance and its costs are high.
• As data grows in production environment, it becomes slow.

• Developer features need to be beefed up - namely adding the ability to search code for a phrase or keyword and the ability to do the same in the "relationship graph" in the database.
• Add ability for users to edit the same table record at the same time by version control.
• Allow Filemaker Server to use more than 1 core; currently multi-processing is not supported and it can be tricky to find just the right server to support the application you've built to the fullest capacity.

Since our services are running in IBM Kubernetes, using IBM Cloud Databases seem to be the best option. It may provide better performance than other vendors as everything is running in the same cloud. The overall experience so far is good as well.

It it not really up to me but my opinion does have some weight in the decision and the reason I would renew my use FileMaker Pro 8.5 is because I am finally getting used to it! Now that I have been working with the program, tasks have become quicker and projects are getting done faster. File Maker Pro 8.5 really is a versatile tool and I think we are just scratching the surface with it's abilities.

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.

The usability rating I'm providing is for the development interface - the usability of the application you build is relative to how much effort is put into the application. Filemaker needs to roll out some features that are "modern" sooner rather than later. They do roll out new features every year, but at a slow pace. We generally get 1 new TRULY useful feature every year. They need to step it up some!

Any issues related to DB2's availability are usually resolved easily and fast. We also have a team of dedicated analysts and admins to support the database technically. Once in a while we do request support from IBM for some complex issues that the on premise team can't resolve and the response is usually pretty fast and support is 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.

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.

The forums are great with lots of helpful experts and the staff monitor them to provide help where needed. There have been a couple of unique technical issues I've had to deal with that I haven't been able to get resolved so I chose to score this a 9 instead of a 10.

Suggest you use an iterative R.A.D. or AGILE development approach. (i.e. rather than writing a gigantic spec for a system, then building it). FileMaker facilitates quick prototypes. Developing an example, then allowing users to "try it out" is a snap.

Db2 is one of the best relational databases I’ve used. It has the ability to maintain large amount of data and execution of million transactions in fraction of a second. If you use it properly, an organization can build a database with thousands of tables, and it can provide the exact information for the applications within a short amount of time

FileMaker is still the quickest way to go from zero to having a minimum viable working solution. Simple solutions can be built in as little as a afternoon of development. It is the only tool I am aware of which allows tech savy end users with domain knowledge to build bespoke apps for their businesses without undertaking professional software development training.

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 with small 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 in small bursts
many times a day!!

• Has reduced the downtime or outages due to HADR features which we lagged earlier.
• No manual intervention needed in most situation for us. IN worst case TSA does automatic failover so its transparent for the apps.
• LOB support is little bit problem for us now which we hope will have some improvement in product in future.

• We are a more agile company because of FileMaker. A few of us who are tech-savvy enough to manage the database (but are not professional developers) can make needed adjustments to our database without having to employ an in-house developer or contract with a 3rd party. As our business processes evolve and change, it's easy to update the database to accommodate those changes.