Conor O'Mahony's Database Diary

Your source of IBM database software news (DB2, Informix, Hadoop, & more)

Archive for the ‘Oracle Database’ Category

Webcast: Options for your Oracle Database Workloads on HP Itanium Servers

leave a comment »

Previously, in the wake of the Oracle Itanium announcement, I blogged about how IBM DB2 Welcomes Oracle Database/HP Itanium Customers. I also relayed the results of an early survey of the HP-UX community about their view on their options in HP-UX Administrators Consider their Oracle Database Options.

Since then I have had a little time to reflect, and have put together a Webcast titled Options for your Oracle Database Workloads on HP Itanium Servers. If you have Oracle Database on HP-UX, make sure to check out the webcast, and please add your feedback in comments so others can benefit from your experiences/opinions.

About these ads

Written by Conor O'Mahony

July 27, 2011 at 11:23 am

Going to Oracle OpenWorld? Get Free DB2 Training and Certification.

with 2 comments

If you are an Oracle Database DBA who is going to Oracle OpenWorld in San Francisco this year, you should check out a free training course from IBM. Immediately before the conference, we are offering a free hands-on course that is designed to help people with Oracle Database skills learn DB2. Of course, because DB2 now supports so many Oracle Database-like features, it is much easier for Oracle professionals to work with DB2. Not only does the course discuss the differences between the products, but it also gives you hands-on experience with DB2. This is a great opportunity. It is an easy and affordable way to expand your skills/resume to include DB2. You’re going to San Francisco anyway, so all you have to do is get your employer to spring for a couple of additional hotel nights. There’s even an opportunity to take a free official certification test as part of the course. The course is two days long, and takes place on Friday 30 Sept and Sat 01 Oct in San Francisco. To learn more and register, please go to

Written by Conor O'Mahony

July 27, 2011 at 11:04 am

Oracle’s Shameful Study: Oracle Database 11gR2 vs. IBM DB2 9.7

with 7 comments

Anyone who has spent any length of time around IT will have encountered their fair share of shameful vendor-sponsored studies. It is an unfortunate reality of the over-aggressive marketing that sometimes comes to the fore. In my opinion, a recent study from ORC International that was commissioned by Oracle is one of the most worthless vendor-sponsored studies that I have ever seen.

Please understand that I, as someone working with DB2, have a natural bias against Oracle. Please also understand that the product I work on is presented in an unfavorable light in this study. That being said, I think I have reasonable grounds for my position. Please let me know if you agree or disagree. And, by the way, I am open to an equally critical examination of any vendor-sponsored studies that I commission.

The study in question is titled Database Manageability and Productivity Cost Comparison Study: Oracle Database 11g Release 2 vs. IBM DB2 Enterprise 9.7. It claims that database administrators can perform administrative tasks in 43% less time and with 45% fewer steps in Oracle Database 11g when compared with IBM DB2 9.7. This is actually the fifth such study commissioned by Oracle. The original study was written by Rauch Associates, then the Edison Group wrote the next three instances of the study, and now the latest installment comes from ORC International.

Flawed Methodology

The first thing I’d like to point out is that the methodology for this report is overly simplistic, and could be prone to incorrect conclusions. It uses two metrics: the amount of time it takes a DBA to perform a task, and the number of steps involved in performing a task.

Of course, when you think about the time measurements, you’ve got to wonder about the relevant levels of experience of the DBAs used for the tests. This metric is, as you can imagine, subject to wild disparity. In order to put this metric into perspective, we need to know the experience levels of the DBAs involved. Without this information, the time measurements are incomplete. Even with this information, the time measurements are still subject to question, given the inexact nature of human experience levels and human ability.

And it goes without saying that a simple count of the number of steps needed to complete a task is an overly simplistic metric. For instance, when creating a tablespace in Oracle Database, there is a single screen with a number of settings for creating a tablespace. There is little or no on-screen guidance, and no context-sensitive help for the settings. Even though this is a usability nightmare, this would count as a single step. On the other hand, in DB2 you have the option of using a nice 7-screen wizard with lots of great context-sensitive help. Is this one step, or seven steps? You can quickly see that a simple count of the number of steps is simply not reliable.

Flawed Logic

To compound matters, the logic also appears to be flawed. The study goes to great lengths to construct the framework for the tasks that will be compared. They claim that “DBAs were interviewed about the amount of time they typically spent in each of the four areas of study to determine the weighted workload value for each subject area, and multiple database disciplines were chosen, including 24x7x365 production DBAs as well as application and development DBAs“. The upshot of all those interviews is that 45% of a DBAs time is spent with Performance and Tuning Tasks. I don’t think this is an unreasonable estimation of the amount of time, especially in Oracle Database environments. However, the interesting thing is that there are three tasks in the Performance and Tuning section, and two of those require 0 steps and 0 time for Oracle Database. This area where DBAs report that they are spending 45% of their time requires only 2 steps and 8 seconds across all three tasks in an Oracle Database environment. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out that something doesn’t add up here. Not only does this supposedly time-consuming set of tasks take almost no time and effort, but this relative disparity is then weighted heavier than everything else in the findings. As if the flawed methodology was not enough, this flawed logic makes the findings even more questionable.

Mysterious Changes

As I mentioned earlier, this study is essentially an updated version of the study from Edison that compared Oracle 11g and DB2 9.5. Both studies essentially use the same methodology. The primary difference is that this latest study uses the current versions of the products. But if you compare the two studies, you will notice something very mysterious. In several cases, DB2 now has a higher complexity score, even though the same interfaces are available. For example, in the previous report from Edison, creating a table took 17 steps in Oracle Database and 5 steps in DB2. Now, mysteriously, it takes 17 steps in Oracle Database and 17 steps in DB2. How can Oracle and ORC International explain this fact? Why does something that had a complexity score of 5, now suddenly have a complexity score of 17?

Is this an Apples-to-Apples Comparison?

It is also interesting to note that this study takes advantage of Oracle’s add-on products that must be separately purchased (namely, the Diagnostic and Tuning Packs). However, they do not do the same for DB2 (in particular, they do not use IBM Optim Performance Manager or DB2 Recovery Expert). Instead, they use the deprecated DB2 Control Center. Why did they choose to perform tasks only with a subset of the tools available to DB2 DBAs, yet they include extra charge products for the Oracle tasks?

And a Suspicious Twist

And the final thing I’d like to draw your attention to is the “Out of the box installation” step. Notice that the DBA performing the tests encountered a bug that elevated the DB2 complexity score from 1 up to a whopping 15. The study states that they encountered JR28800. However, the IBM support site states that this bug was resolved in DB2 8.1 Fixpack 17. How is it possible that they ran into a problem in DB2 9.7 that was resolved in 8.1 Fixpack 17? Did Oracle and ORC International really use the current version of DB2, or did they use a version that is so old that it is no longer even in service?

There is a Better Way

The good news is that there is a better methodology for comparisons like this. It was developed by researchers looking for a general way to determine time and labor costs associated with IT systems. They presented their findings at the 10th IFIP/IEEE International Symposium on Integrated Network Management 2007 in a paper titled Predicting Labor Cost through IT Management Complexity Metrics. It would be very interesting if Oracle were to use these more accurate and objective complexity metrics, rather than their own suspiciously rudimentary measures. If they did, they may find that the results are closer to the finding in the study covered in the Comparing Common DBA Tasks for IBM DB2 and Oracle Database post, where DB2 is shown to be clearly superior.

Let’s Hear from Actual Users of both Products

By now, you’ve probably had your fill of hearing about vendor-sponsored studies. Let’s hear from people who switched from Oracle Database to DB2, and are willing to go on record with their experiences:

“The total cost of ownership with DB2 running on IBM systems is almost half the cost of Oracle Database on Sun systems. With DB2, our current DBAs will be able to support more applications and more users.”
- Anuprita Daga, Chief Manager, IT, Reliance Life Insurance

“Our IT team now has more time to work on other value-added tasks due to DB2 self-tuning properties and the seamless integration with the SAP software.”
- Tom DeJuneas, IT manager at Coca-Cola Bottling Co Consolidated

“DB2 requires less attention from the Basis DBAs than Oracle”
- Andrew Juarez, Lead SAP Basis Administrator at Coca-Cola Bottling Co Consolidated

“We switched from Oracle Database to IBM DB2 and cut our data management costs in half, while improving performance and reliability of business applications.”
- Sandro Reátegui, Systems Architect, Banco de Crédito del Peru

“Data administration costs have also decreased. DB2 automates many tasks, such as memory allocation, storage management and business policy maintenance, freeing the company’s database administrators to focus on new projects.”
- Sergey Golubev, Head of IT Maintenance and Networking Department, JSC Rietumu Banka

Written by Conor O'Mahony

July 19, 2011 at 11:10 pm

Got Oracle Database Skills? Get DB2 Skills at No Charge…

leave a comment »

IBM has a couple of great ways for people with Oracle Database skills to easily add DB2 skills to their resumes. These are available at no charge, allowing you to add skills to your resume and become more attractive to potential employers.

  • The IBM DB2 Workshop for Oracle Professionals is a 2-day classroom-based workshop. This workshop helps people who are already familiar with Oracle Database to learn DB2. That’s correct… high-quality classroom-based training at no charge! Attendees even get to take the DB2 9 Family Fundamentals Certification Exam at no charge. We currently have workshops scheduled in Brazil, Canada, Cyprus, France, Germany, Greece, Hong Kong, Indonesia, Korea, Malaysia, Philippines, Romania, Singapore, Spain, Switzerland, Thailand, Turkey, and the United States. If your location is not listed on the workshop Web page, please check back soon as IBM frequently updates the list of classes.
  • IBM developerWorks is a tremendous resource. It was awarded the Forrester Groundswell Award with Josh Bernoff claiming that developerWorks “is perhaps the largest and most effective customer community we’ve seen.” Well, developerWorks has a new DB2 Fundamentals for Oracle Professionals: Introduction to DB2 learning path. These learning paths are a step-by-step set of articles that help build your proficiency. There are additional learning paths available if you master the introductory one.

Written by Conor O'Mahony

June 14, 2011 at 9:55 am

A Closer Examination of Oracle’s “Database Performance” Advertisement

with 20 comments

Last week, I was in Dallas speaking at an event. In the morning, as I left my hotel room, I picked up the Wall Street Journal which was outside my door. I was surprised to see that Oracle are re-running an old advertisement:

Oracle Advertisement - Database Performance

Why was I surprised? Because this advertisement is based on an industry benchmark that shows that Oracle uses 9 times the number of CPU cores to achieve only 3 times the performance of the IBM result. To put it another way, if you look at the per-core throughput, the IBM system is 3 times faster than the Oracle system. Oracle highlight the overall throughput of the system, but if you do some investigating you will see that the Oracle system in question uses 1,728 CPU cores, whereas the IBM system in question uses only 192 CPU cores. Considering that you typically pay for software based upon the number of CPU cores, I know which system I’d prefer to be buying software for :-)

By the way, if you want to see how big these benchmark systems are, check out this blog post… TPC-C Result in Real World Terms: Big Macs and Walmart. Of course, while the benchmark systems themselves are—for the most part—disconnected from today’s real world situations, that is not to say that they are not useful. They are. They serve a very useful purpose in stress testing the different vendor’s products. And they also demonstrate how efficiently those systems scale out.

This is why I’m surprised that Oracle is persisting with advertising this benchmark result. For fun, let’s create a graph that doesn’t show the overall throughput of the systems. Let’s instead create a graph that shows the throughput per CPU core for these benchmark systems. Some people might consider this to be a good measure of efficiency for the systems. As you can see, when you look at this measure of efficiency, it paints a very different picture (of course, the higher the number, the better).

tpmC per CPU core for leading TPC-C benchmark results

Results on Transaction Processing Performance Council Web site at Results as of 06/08/11.
Oracle SPARC SuperCluster (108 chips, 1728 cores, 13824 threads); 30,249,688 tpmC; $1.01/tpmC; available 6/1/11.
IBM Power 780 cluster (24 chips, 192 cores, 768 threads); 10,366,254 tpmC; $1.38/tpmC; available 10/13/10.
HP Integrity Superdome (64 chips, 128 cores, 256 threads); 4,092,799 tpmC; $2.93/tpmC; available 08/06/07.

Written by Conor O'Mahony

June 8, 2011 at 4:13 pm

A Tale of Two Companies–IBM and Oracle Make Migration Offers

leave a comment »

Last week, IBM and Oracle made “special offers” to organizations willing to consider switching database software. I found the nature of the offers to be very interesting. I believe they say a lot about how IBM and Oracle operate.

The IBM offer involves:

  • A no-charge, detailed financial analysis that shows cost savings for switching from Oracle Database and Oracle WebLogic to IBM DB2 and WebSphere software.
  • A no-charge, customized technical evaluation and conversion plan.
  • A no-charge proof-of-concept where IBM works with clients to perform a side-by-side cost/performance comparison between Oracle and IBM software at an IBM Software Lab or client site.
  • More than 100 online and in-person skills training and certification courses to certify Oracle professionals in the corresponding IBM technology.
  • Zero percent financing for credit qualified clients.

When you combine these offers with the software discounting that is typically found in competitive take-out situations, it makes for an interesting proposition. Of course, you should not forget that IBM DB2 makes it easy to switch from Oracle Database with PL/SQL Support in DB2, which has contributed to more than 1,000 Oracle Database clients instead choosing DB2 in 2010. Organizations have benefitted from a solid business case that puts money back in their IT budget, great performance and reliability, an easy and successful migration, and the ability to leverage their existing PL/SQL skills after the migration.

Okay, that's the IBM proposition. But Oracle have made a proposition of their own. Oracle are offering the ability to get a credit with Oracle for 50% of the net Oracle Database costs, up to $1M. So, if you spend $2M on Oracle Database software license costs for replacing competing software, then Oracle will give you a credit for $1M. At first glance, this is eye-catching. But when you dig a little deeper, you realize that it is impossible to assess the impact of this offer up front. After all, the credit you will get from Oracle depends on the net price you end up paying, and that net price depends on the software discounting levels you manage to negotiate with Oracle.

And don’t forget that Oracle have not invested in “compatibility features” to make migrations easy like IBM has. See what others are saying about these features:

Written by Conor O'Mahony

May 16, 2011 at 11:59 am

Checkmate! New IBM DB2 Advertisement that Compares with Oracle Database

leave a comment »

The second of the series of DB2 ads that compares IBM DB2 with Oracle Database has been released. Here it is…

DB2 on POWER: 3x faster. Check.  As low as 1/3 the price. Mate.

You can find out more about these ads, and the details behind the claims at

Written by Conor O'Mahony

May 12, 2011 at 4:24 pm

Comparing the Performance and Cost of IBM DB2 and Oracle Database

with 3 comments

This is the conclusion of my series of blog posts about the Solitaire Interglobal research, which measures various aspects of database environments. In this post, I’m going to focus on performance and cost in IBM Power Systems environments.

Solitaire examined database performance in 1,430 production environments that use IBM Power Systems. You can see the specific breakdown on the counts of the different types of systems in the full report. Their research includes production systems for credit card processing systems, CRM systems, transaction processing systems, and DSS systems.

Here are the summary performance findings for the credit card, CRM, and transaction-processing systems. They indicate the average number of Transactions Per Second (TPS) for these systems. As you can see, DB2 appears to offer a clear performance advantage over Oracle Database. The full report includes details of the number of TPS for each production system in the analysis.

Database Software Performance on IBM Power Systems - IBM DB2 and Oracle Database - OLTP

And here are the summary performance findings for the Decision Support System (DSS) environments, which use an Average Queries per Minute metric.

Database Software Performance on IBM Power Systems - IBM DB2 and Oracle Database - DSS

Solitaire also determined the operational costs for these environments. These are the costs for infrastructure and staffing. It does not include overhead costs like facilities, acquisition, and initial deployment. As you can see, the operational costs for IBM DB2 compare very favorably with Oracle Database, especially when you consider the superior performance of the DB2-based systems.

Operational Cost for Database Software on IBM Power Systems - IBM DB2 and Oracle Database

And when you include overhead costs to determine the overall costs, as you might imagine, DB2 offers even better value.

Overall Cost for Database Software on IBM Power Systems - IBM DB2 and Oracle Database

You can read and download the full Solitaire report at Comparing Real World Database Performance: IBM® DB2® versus Oracle® Database and Microsoft SQL Server®.

Written by Conor O'Mahony

May 12, 2011 at 11:00 am

Staffing and Time-to-Market for IBM DB2 and Oracle Database Environments

leave a comment »

Solitaire Interglobal surveyed IT departments about the amount of staffing needed for various database-related activities. When it comes to staffing, Solitaire notes that:

These staffing figures were collected from the actual operation groups measured in the other metric collection efforts, and cover organizations in North and South America, Asia, Europe, Antarctica and Australia. These organizations have reported staffing for 24×7 coverage, rather than single shift.

Antartica… really! Anyway, here’s the staffing information, first for IBM Power Systems environments and then for IBM System x environments:

Database Software Staff for IBM DB2 and Oracle Database in IBM Power Systems Environments
Database Software Staff for IBM DB2 and Oracle Database in IBM System x Environments

Solitare notes that a significant contributor to IBM DB2 requiring less staff are the requirements around the service desk or help desk. They attribute the difference to the number of calls, and the amount of time required to handle those calls. If you read the full report, you will see lots of great information about specific percentage differences for number and duration of calls on each platform.

Another interesting metric for comparing database software is time-to-market. This is the amount of time it takes an IT department to get a system up-and-running, from project inception to having live production systems. Time-to-market is a very important consideration for organizations who want to have agile and responsive IT departments. In this case, Solitaire note that:

The systems tracked for this portion of the study were paired based on either simultaneous comparative development, or function point equivalents and application type. The comparison is intended to be evocative and not quantitative, since other critical success factors can enter into this picture.

Here is the time-to-market comparison, first for IBM Power Systems environments and then for IBM System x environments:

Time-to-Market for Database Software Projects involving IBM DB2 and Oracle Database in IBM Power Systems Environments

Time-to-Market for Database Software Projects involving IBM DB2 and Oracle Database in IBM System x Environments

You can read and download the full Solitaire report at Comparing Real World Database Performance: IBM® DB2® versus Oracle® Database and Microsoft SQL Server®.

Written by Conor O'Mahony

May 11, 2011 at 11:00 am

IBM DB2 Users Report that they are More Satisfied than Oracle Database Users

leave a comment »

Yesterday, I blogged about relative outages for IBM DB2 and Oracle Database, as reported by Solitaire Interglobal. Well, Solitaire also surveyed people in data centers regarding their satisfaction levels with database software. Here is how Solitaire introduce their findings:

The ultimate metric for the success of any product is customer satisfaction. The satisfaction rating is an aggregate result of how well the customer feels that the DBMS provides benefit for the expense, reliability and thought leadership. As such, this rating can be seen as the final accolade of how well a product is doing.

Solitaire report the satisfaction for two groups: the Executives that manage the overall organization, and the Operational Staff that work with the systems on a day-to-day basis. Here are the findings. As you can see, both the Executives and the Operational Staff who work with DB2 report a higher satisfaction than those who work with Oracle Database.

First, here are the satisfaction ratings for environments running IBM Power Systems servers.
Database Software Customer Satisfaction in IBM Power Systems Environments

And here are the satisfaction ratings for environments running IBM System x servers.
Database Software Customer Satisfaction in IBM System x Environments

Not only do customers–both Executive and Operational–have a higher satisfaction rating for DB2, but interestingly the people who are hands-on day-in and day-out have the best satisfaction numbers.

You can read and download the full Solitaire report at Comparing Real World Database Performance: IBM® DB2® versus Oracle® Database and Microsoft SQL Server®.

Written by Conor O'Mahony

May 10, 2011 at 11:00 am

Comparing Outages for IBM DB2 and Oracle Database

leave a comment »

Solitaire Interglobal monitor client data centers around the world. Recently, they analyzed certain performance chartacteristics for database software within those data centers. One of those performance chartacteristics is reliability.

They measured database software reliability from 1,430 Power Systems/AIX production environments. Here is their explanation of the following charts:

…both the planned and unplanned outages affect the overall usability of the total system. The charts below show the number of outages that were recorded during the testing period, as well as, the total number of minutes that those outages consumed. The number of outages has been normalized for a 100-platform operation, with both planned and unplanned outages included.

As you can see, Oracle Database has more outages, and longer outages. Solitaire indicate that most of these are planned outages, with DB2 users reporting easier movement and allocation of resources. The next most significant factor was that Oracle Database requires a greater number of patches and upgrades.

Normalized Outage Count - Planned and Unplanned on IBM Power Systems - IBM DB2 and Oracle Database - Source: Solitaire Interglobal

Normalized Outage Count - Planned and Unplanned on IBM Power Systems - IBM DB2 and Oracle Database - Source: Solitaire Interglobal

Here is the same analysis for database software in IBM System x environments. In this case, the analysis is for 13,927 production environments and the number of outages has been normalized for a 75-platform operation.

Planned and Unplanned Outage Count on IBM System x - IBM DB2, Oracle Database, and Microsoft SQL Server - Source: Solitaire Interglobal

Planned and Unplanned Outage Time on IBM System x - IBM DB2, Oracle Database, and Microsoft SQL Server - Source: Solitaire Interglobal

Over the next few days, I will share more findings from the Solitaire report. You can read and download the full report at Comparing Real World Database Performance: IBM® DB2® versus Oracle® Database and Microsoft SQL Server®.

Written by Conor O'Mahony

May 9, 2011 at 11:59 am

Forrester Total Economic Impact: Migrating a Heterogeneous Database Environment to IBM DB2

with one comment

Forrester have just assessed the total economic impact of migrating a heterogeneous database environment like Oracle Database to IBM DB2. The results are quite startling. Forrester talked directly with five organizations who migrated from database vendors like Oracle to IBM DB2, and then modeled the financial implications of such a move. They determined that, for a representative organization, the payback period for such a move is 12 months and that the risk-adjusted ROI for such a move is 192% over a 3 year period. Here are the summary findings:

3-year Risk-Adjusted ROI/TCO for Moving from Vendors like Oracle to IBM DB2

The report notes that:

Incremental benefits resulting from the migration to DB2 included improvements in storage and administration, efficiency, lower operational and capital costs, and savings of reduced storage through compression.

The report goes into good detail on a breakdown of the costs and benefits for such a move. You can download the entire report at The Total Economic Impact of Migrating a Heterogeneous Database Environment to IBM DB2.

Total Economic Impact Of Migrating A Heterogeneous Database Environment To IBM DB2

Written by Conor O'Mahony

April 13, 2011 at 11:56 am

Performance Information for Oracle Exadata?

with 2 comments

It is difficult to get direct performance comparisons between Oracle Exadata and competing products. Last month, The Register published what may be such a comparison in its IBM: Our appliance servers smoke Ellison’s ‘phony baloney’ article. They include an image that compares the performance and price of the IBM Smart Analytics System with a leading competitor. The IBM Smart Analytics System is, of course, an integrated hardware/software system for data warehousing and analytics that is based on DB2. The article covers an IBM Investor Day presentation that was delivered by Steve Mills of IBM, and includes the following explanatory passage:

“We benchmark all the time,” Mills said, and he pulled out some real tests to support his point. “We have a favorite competitor who likes the color red. We like the color blue. This is real workload benchmarking, not some phony baloney made-up thing that goes in an ad. We deliver a system that is fast for what customers run.”

Here is the chart that is included in the article. The Register assert that the competitor in red is Oracle Exadata.

Comparing Performance of IBM Smart Analytics System and Oracle Exadata

Written by Conor O'Mahony

April 13, 2011 at 9:22 am

HP-UX Administrators Consider their Oracle Database Options

with one comment

IDEAS International have just published an interesting blog post titled HP-UX at Crossroads as Oracle Ceases Development for Itanium. In light of Oracle pulling the plug on Itanium, IDEAS International polled HP-UX administrators on HP’s IT Resource Center Forums about alternatives to Oracle Database on HP-UX. Here are the results of that poll:

Which database are you most likely to consider as an alternative to Oracle on HP-UX?
Source: IDEAS poll of 66 HP-UX administrators from HP’s IT Resource Center Forums

The IDEAS International blog post has a lot more detail. Read the full blog post at: HP-UX at Crossroads as Oracle Ceases Development for Itanium.

Written by Conor O'Mahony

March 29, 2011 at 11:17 am

IBM DB2 Welcomes Oracle Database/HP Itanium Customers

with 6 comments

Oracle dropped a bombshell a few days ago by announcing that it will no longer supportdevelop for Itanium-based systems. It didn’t take long for commentators to realize that this jesture was not aimed at Intel who manufacture Itanium, but at HP whose Unix-based servers use Itanium. I think Paul McDougall at InformationWeek sums it up best in his Itanium Dump Could Cost Oracle Billions when he said that:

Larry Ellison thinks he has found a way to shore up the struggling server business he bought for $7.4 billion last year in the form of Sun Microsystems—force customers to buy Sun hardware if they want to continue to run the latest Oracle software.

This is big news when you consider how many Oracle customers run on HP systems. It is strange to think that one of the basic tenets of business—that the customer is always right—does not seem to apply here. These customers are facing the prospect of being forced off their platform of choice. I imagine Oracle is dealing with quite a few unhappy customers right now. I wonder how much trust those customers have that Oracle will not continue such practices in the future, forcing customers into deeper and deeper levels of dependence on Oracle.

The good news is you have a viable alternative. IBM DB2 is currently replacing Oracle Database in more and more environments. Forrester and Gartner have both covered this phenomenon. You now have the option of protecting the investment in your HP environment, and simply switching the database software. Just a couple of years ago, this would not have been a viable option. But thanks to recent advancements in database migrations, it is now relatively straighforward.

Why are customers moving off Oracle Database and onto IBM DB2? Well, first of all, it costs less to move to DB2 than it does to stay on Oracle Database. Organizations are saving considerable amounts of money by making this move. Consider Reliance Life who determined that, in their case, the total cost of ownership for moving to DB2 is half the cost of staying with Oracle Database. But customers are also moving because database migrations are now more straightforward, taking considerably less time and having considerably lower risk (just look at those Forrester and Gartner links for confirmation). In other words, for many organizations, moving from Oracle Database to DB2 has become a viable strategy for freeing up future IT budget. Not only that, but IT staff can continue to use their Oracle skills after the migration. For instance, I know customers who have migrated from Oracle Database to IBM DB2, and continue to program in PL/SQL after the migration (DB2 supports PL/SQL).

If you want to learn more about moving to DB2, visit the Break Free Web site or attend a free Migration Clinic in your area.

Written by Conor O'Mahony

March 27, 2011 at 7:40 pm


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 71 other followers

%d bloggers like this: