March 26, 2014 at 10:28 am
Our company has made the decision to gradually leave sql server in favor of DB2. We have a wide variety of applications ( many acquisitions ) running on MSSql, Oracle, DB2 and others. I think pricing had a lot to do with it.
It will take a few years to migrate the application in my division from C# .net to Python/Java ( I think ) and the databases. I won't be with the company long enough to worry about it but wondered what thoughts you might have about DB2 versus Sql.
March 26, 2014 at 11:27 am
Probably need to hear more of the justification, but I doubt that there will be any money savings from going to DB2, even without the cost of the conversion.
March 26, 2014 at 2:25 pm
Indianrock (3/26/2014)
Our company has made the decision to gradually leave sql server in favor of DB2. We have a wide variety of applications ( many acquisitions ) running on MSSql, Oracle, DB2 and others. I think pricing had a lot to do with it.It will take a few years to migrate the application in my division from C# .net to Python/Java ( I think ) and the databases. I won't be with the company long enough to worry about it but wondered what thoughts you might have about DB2 versus Sql.
I don't think it's the Cost factor too. Could be some missing functionality in SQL Server and .Net ..
--
SQLBuddy
March 26, 2014 at 2:45 pm
One result of this decision is the departure of several senior c# .NET developers along with a few sql server DBAs. The only reason I've heard was pricing, but who knows. Might just be some manager who used to work in an IBM environment and thinks sql server is still like MS Access.
March 26, 2014 at 4:44 pm
Cost alone? Nah, surely not. Not that SQL Server is cheap any more, it isn't, but DB2 is hardly the low cost alternative. It's either politics, or some other piece of functionality. Cost doesn't make sense.
"The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood"
- Theodore Roosevelt
Author of:
SQL Server Execution Plans
SQL Server Query Performance Tuning
March 27, 2014 at 9:09 am
Indianrock (3/26/2014)
Our company has made the decision to gradually leave sql server in favor of DB2. We have a wide variety of applications ( many acquisitions ) running on MSSql, Oracle, DB2 and others. I think pricing had a lot to do with it.It will take a few years to migrate the application in my division from C# .net to Python/Java ( I think ) and the databases. I won't be with the company long enough to worry about it but wondered what thoughts you might have about DB2 versus Sql.
When I was in HP, we used to have DB2 , Oracle 10g and 11g (still they have, I think), and MS-SQL (lot of flavors, even SQL200). In my experience, the main reasons for these moves are:
-"Politics" (internal issues within the company with X or Y database product and that company)
-The guru guy(s) that writes .NET (or his team) is leaving the company
I am not a DB2 expert, and MS-SQL is not cheap anymore. But I am not aware of any huge cost saving thing that make a company jump to DB2 instead. Leaving MS-SQL for MySQL or MariaDB? maybe, but I personally find MySQL inferior in many ways. Not to start a DB engine war, but that's my opinion.
March 27, 2014 at 9:19 am
True, Politics play a big role in these decisions ..
--
SQLBuddy
March 27, 2014 at 11:25 am
It depends..... are they simply spinning up an AIX or Linux server, installing one DB2 instance and moving all of the different SQL Server dbs to it that are on multiple machines?
Back in 2011 we finished up a project that eliminated our AIX DB2 Data Warehouse and our Mainframe DB2 systems and moved it all to Oracle and a little of it to SQL Server. The justification was to sunset an outdated Mainframe and AIX server and to 'modernize' our data center along with a ton of cost savings. Well, honestly we got an Oracle ExaData server and most of it moved there. If any of you have dealt with Oracle the word inexpensive is never in a conversation. It costed MORE! The one thing it did do though was take us from four different platforms down to two and eliminated the Mainframe of which very few people left here knew anything about it. It also allowed them to eliminate 9 IT positions. Sad because the Mainframe is by far the most reliable and highest up time system we ever have had here.
March 28, 2014 at 10:35 am
I'm really curious to know why your making the switch... I work in a DB2/MS SQL mixed shop where we have DB2 LUW and on z/OS plus we have many MS SQL Servers. They all play well together for the most part.
So my question is why, and to what version of DB2 are you moving to (LUW or z)? I agree with others, the cost I'd assume is probably equal to or more, and I've found IBM support just as teeth grinding if not more so than MS support. The whole PMR process through IBM is crazy and their online support is about where MSDN was 10 years ago as far as quality with outdated info and many broken links.
With that being said I do like DB2 as a RDBMS for the most part, and though some of its methods are crazy there's some logic to most of it. Just be ready for connectivity issues until you learn the DB2/IBM way of doing it since it's completely different from MS SQL. Learn how to install the DB2 client and catalog nodes and databases since that'll be the biggest thing for clients who make direct DB calls. Also research DB2 connect of you plan on using DB2 for Z. It can be used for DB2 LUW as well, but I don't think it's needed as much on that front. Also start learning IBM Data Studio. It's their SSMS equivalent, and though it's nice it's buggy and not very intuitive.
If you'd like send me a PM and i can share more info and some of my notes on moving between DB2 and MS SQL there since they're outside of the forum scope.
March 28, 2014 at 10:52 am
I believe it will be LUW "pure data" but I'm not really involved in the change ( retiring in a few months 🙂 ) I see open positions for very senior DB2 DBAs with advanced Linux/Unix scripting skills. In our own local application, everything was built on sql server from C# .Net using ORM technology almost totally by developers and no DBA involvement until way late in the game -- years after product rollout.
That wasn't a great way to do things, but whether the current switch has anything to do with a backlash towards more old-school DBA approaches I can't say.
March 28, 2014 at 11:28 am
Good luck and hope it works out well.
I managed some DB2 people years ago and I found it to be more work and more cumbersome than SQL Server, but a fine product that worked well.
March 28, 2014 at 11:36 am
There has to be some political or architecture change involved here. There cannot possibly be any cost savings now (if there were any to begin with) because the man hours for development, QA, UAT, and release to migrate from C# to Python, PHP, or whatever would blow the cost savings out of the water. There has to be a push toward open source languages (which is a synonym for "unsupported" IMHO) which is also typically politically motivated. This of course, is my opinion only.
Jared
CE - Microsoft
Viewing 12 posts - 1 through 11 (of 11 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply