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
MariaDB Platform
Score 9.5 out of 10
N/A
MariaDB is an open-source relational database made by the original developers of MySQL, supported by the MariaDB Foundation and a community of developers. The community states recent additional capabilities as including clustering with Galera Cluster 4, compatibility with Oracle Database, and Temporal Data Tables, allowing one to query the data as it stood at any point in the past.
N/A
MySQL
Score 8.3 out of 10
N/A
MySQL is a popular open-source relational and embedded database, now owned by Oracle.
N/A
Pricing
Db2
MariaDB Platform
MySQL
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
MariaDB Platform
MySQL
Free Trial
Yes
Yes
No
Free/Freemium Version
Yes
Yes
No
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
Yes
Yes
No
Entry-level Setup Fee
Optional
Optional
No setup fee
Additional Details
—
—
—
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Db2
MariaDB Platform
MySQL
Considered Multiple Products
Db2
Verified User
Analyst
Chose Db2
MySQL was definitely faster in terms of making queries, but DB2 had many features that protected against errors and easier to use for SQL beginners.
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 …
Before selecting Db2, I had the opportunity to work with three different products: MySQL, IBM API Connect and IBM Cloud Databases.MySQL is a very popular and effective relational database management system, especially known for its ease of use and reliability. While working …
I have experience with the above-mentioned similar products but mainly with MySQL. In terms of speed and query optimization capabilities, Db2 is far ahead in comparison to MySQL. Because of various issues like scalability, multiple departments hitting DB together causing …
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.
From working with other databases, I always felt that Db2 was at the top of its game in all aspects of performance, recoverability, and stability—pretty much everything you want out of an Enterprise database system.
IBM Db2 provides solutions for Data Lakes, Operational Databases, Data Warehouses, and Fast Data. IBM has a rich history of being a diversity, equity, and inclusion leader. Easy to design, implement, test, and implement with huge support material across different platforms. …
Considering Price, features configurations timelines of the IBM Db2 we found that is very Robust in Scalability, Reliability, Highly Available. also, we are already a IBM products user and we are much satisfied with the overall product as well as customer support from IBM team. …
Db2 is more scalable, reliable, and easily configurable than all the products that we evaluated. We were already using some of the services provided by IBM and were satisfied with the support and pricing. This led us to select Db2 as our database management system.
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.
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 …
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 …
DB2 is much more robust than Oracle or mySQL when used in the Z/OS or Linux platform as it has the best error detection/warning system and also is very fast when accessed over the LAN in remote branch locations. It is scalable to a limited extent though as is the case in all …
We migrated away from MySQL because of stability issues; when choosing a new database system we considered FirebirdSQL (having some experience from other projects) and did not use it because of stability and lack of standard SQL features in its query language; and Amazon's …
We selected MariaDB over MySQL because of their true open source model and performance optimizations. It was also helpful that it is a drop-in replacement for MySQL so there was no need to update our various software drivers.
Thanks to MySQL compatibility, everything you've learned while using it can be utilized when using MariaDB. Therefore it's a better choice than MongoDB and MSSQL if you're looking to switch away from MySQL. MariaDB is also a very mature and stable product, unlike MongoDB that …
MariaDB provided the best fit for our business in upgrading legacy systems which were originally designed to use MySQL as a backend. By using MariaDB, no changes to the overall systems needed to be altered, reducing the time needed to upgrade everything. Other solutions …
MySQL is still a great solution, but MariaDB offers a more extensive set of free features than are available for MySQL. We also feel more confident that MariaDB will remain free to use over time. End users haven't noticed much of a difference, but from a development cost …
We tried Percona also, but we sometimes having trouble with it and on some cases it having lesser performance than MariaDB. MySQL is the the facto standard, we use this only in scenario that it cannot be replaced by MariaDB. MSSQL is used only if the client ask for Windows …
MariaDB is very similar to MySQL, but MariaDB has more alternative database engines and ideas for the future where MySQL is offers the stable and more mature version (if not stale).
MariaDB is perhaps the best open source database server available, combining a wide range of supported platforms, MySQL compatibility, a low footprint, and reasonably high performance. If you have cost constraints, or limited server resources, I recommend MariaDB, particularly …
MariaDB is the clear winner compared to any other database I've used. Reliable, scale-able, affordable--you name the consideration and MariaDB is the winner.
MariaDB is cheaper than Oracle Database and MSSQL server. MySQL owned by Oracle. So MariaDB has too many forks, but enough people in the community. PostgreSQL has a larger community and better administration. However, it s not like MariaDB w/ Galera. MariaDB is not good for …
MariaDB stacks up the the competition just fine. Due to is ture open source nature we do not have to worry about licencing and spending money on nothing. Moreover, MariaDB does everything that we need to get done. We can run data that is a million rows or many smaller projects …
Postgres, SQL Server, DB2, Oracle, DashDB, MongoDB, RedShift - all of them have their strengths and weaknesses. I will say this about MySQL though, it is generally the first database chosen by a startup. It's easy to use, easy to deploy, free, and it just works.
Although big players in the market such as Red Hat Enterprise Linux and Fedora jumped ship to use MariaDB, we found it more viable to use MySQL as a company. This was because MySQL was open source and offered a lot more functionality than other same priced software that were …
The three are relational databases or managers for relational database (except for MariaDB whose approach is based on NoSQL models) with the ability to store large databases and respond to demanding business circumstances, however MySQL compared to Microsoft SQL Server …
I'm not that expert on MariaDB, but as far as I know, it has great support from tools and frameworks, but it's not that usual to find hosting with it installed rather than MySQL. Since MariaDB is a 'fork' from MySQL (since it was bought by Oracle), the transition from MySQL is …
After Oracle bought MySQL, I have pivoted some projects to use MariaDB instead, which is a fork of MySQL and maintained by the community and original developers of MySQL. This is free under the GNU GPL, and is not impacted by decisions Oracle makes for MySQL. RDS has the …
MySQL is perceived as less scalable than DB2. DB2 provides for an easy migration up to more scale if it is acceptable or required to remain in the IBM ecosystem, which can scale all the way to z-Series mainframes. For some enterprises like insurance and banking, this is a …
Each of the products has its own merits and demerits. however since MySQL is a very good documentation and global community its easy to learn and apply in different stages for analytics work. compare to other data bases its simple for setup and work on it. MySQL is cost …
We chose MySQL because of its open-source nature and its compatibility with various systems, languages, and databases. It is easy to use and fast. Additionally, it has been in the market for more than 30 years now which makes it a reliable option when compared to its …
Verified User
Consultant
Chose MySQL
it is cost effective solution and that time we were looking the good RDMS which can support the GIS based datatypes.
A bit on the more complex side, but definitely one of the more popular solutions between our customers. As a stable alternative to the sometimes really pricy Oracle DB, it performed well for most of our not-database-heavy projects. It was a bit slower than no-SQL solutions on …
MySQL provides the option to reduce support and maintenance cost when P0 Level 1 support is not really needed for databases used for noncritical use cases and workloads. Other versions that include Microsoft SQL, Amazon RDS, etc don't provide such options and are overkill. …
It is one of the tools that we had stopped using some time ago and in the last year we amplified its use thanks to its benefits and new functionalities.
Of course compare to no SQL databases it's slower but there is a completely different use case for them... In my opinion it is better than PostgreSQL, it's easier to configure and has the same performance, or approximately the same. Of course Oracle Database is a way bigger …
We had been using indexes on our MySQL databases for a while now but never before properly learned about them. Generally I put an index on any fields that I will be searching or selecting using a WHERE clause but sometimes it doesn't seem so black and white.
I prefer MySQL because of the simplicity of getting started and the ease of use. It has a very simple to use editor where one is able to input their SQL code and execute it from in application.
MySQL provides a feature to easily move to another technology. As we know, most of the users like to use MySQL in the backend because it reduces the overall business cost. No need to pay additional charges. Regularly updated.
The main argument of this decision was by popularity. At the time (2010), MySQL was the most popular open source database. Between 2010 and today, we evaluated different databases and PostgreSQL is a great competitor. SQL Server is good for windows applications but it's not …
The main reason that we went with MySQL is the cost. It's very cost effective and can do almost everything that Oracle can do. Database management is also very simple when compared to Oracle as we didn't have to contact the DBA for issues. Also, we found a lot of improvement in …
I have used more than 10 different SQL databases over the course of my career. Of those, the three I find myself using over and over include MySQL, Oracle and SQL Server. I have actually replaced smaller deployments of Oracle and SQL Server with MySQL as a way to reduce …
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.
MySQL is best suited for applications on platform like high-traffic content-driven websites, small-scale web apps, data warehouses which regards light analytical workloads. However its less suited for areas like enterprise data warehouse, OLAP cubes, large-scale reporting, applications requiring flexible or semi-structured data like event logging systems, product configurations, dynamic forms.
Simpler learning curve. MariaDB is a cleaner, simpler system that is (IMO) easier to learn and easier to manage effectively than many other database systems.
Lower hardware requirements. After migrating to MariaDB from another database software system, we find that our hardware needs have substantially decreased.
MariaDB support is very responsive. It's like they actually care. On the few occasions we've run into technical issues, support has always come through with what we needed. Once it was showing me a relatively new feature the server supported that I wasn't aware of, that, once I was able to properly make use of it helped me resolve a serious production performance issue.
Architectural flexibility. As an example, the ready availability of synchronous (Galera) versus asynchronous replication schemes without being locked into one of the other by enormous technical complexity or punitive licensing, allows the customer to find what really works best for their needs.
Driver Support - Some third party applications use database drivers that cause unexplained slowness with MariaDB. This can be worked around by using the MySQL drivers, but it's not clear what causes the problem in the first place.
Support - While online communities are helpful in diagnosing problems, there isn't as much professional documentation/support available for MariaDB as some of the other major database options.
Data Visualization - It would be helpful if there were more built in options for analyzing statistics and generating reports.
Learning curve: is big. Newbies will face problems in understanding the platform initially. However, with plenty of online resources, one can easily find solutions to problems and learn on the go.
Backup and restore: MySQL is not very seamless. Although the data is never ruptured or missed, the process involved is not very much user-friendly. Maybe, a new command-line interface for only the backup-restore functionality shall be set up again to make this very important step much easier to perform and maintain.
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.
For teaching Databases and SQL, I would definitely continue to use MySQL. It provides a good, solid foundation to learn about databases. Also to learn about the SQL language and how it works with the creation, insertion, deletion, updating, and manipulation of data, tables, and databases. This SQL language is a foundation and can be used to learn many other database related concepts.
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.
MariaDB is very usable and stable to be used in production settings as an alternative to MySQL. The shortcomings of SQL are present but well understood in the community, and if the decision were to be made again, I would choose MariaDB over MySQL on future projects.
I give MySQL a 9/10 overall because I really like it but I feel like there are a lot of tech people who would hate it if I gave it a 10/10. I've never had any problems with it or reached any of its limitations but I know a few people who have so I can't give it a 10/10 based on those complaints.
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.
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.
We have launched several inquiries to MariaDB support and they have always responded very quickly and have not been tutoring for the duration of the incident/problem.
Likewise, they want to hold constant meetings with the client to get their opinion as well as how they can help.
I see a very human support and concerned about the customer.
We have never contacted MySQL enterprise support team for any issues related to MySQL. This is because we have been using primarily the MySQL Server community edition and have been using the MySQL support forums for any questions and practical guidance that we needed before and during the technical implementations. Overall, the support community has been very helpful and allowed us to make the most out of the community edition.
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.
MariaDB stacks up the the competition just fine. Due to is ture open source nature we do not have to worry about licencing and spending money on nothing. Moreover, MariaDB does everything that we need to get done. We can run data that is a million rows or many smaller projects on the same environment with little overhead. One of the best features that MariaDB has is the ability of backup or dump data to standard text sql statements. That was one of the reasons why we choose MariaDb because it makes backups or transferring data a snap
MongoDB has a dynamic schema for how data is stored in 'documents' whereas MySQL is more structured with tables, columns, and rows. MongoDB was built for high availability whereas MySQL can be a challenge when it comes to replication of the data and making everything redundant in the event of a DR or outage.
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!!