Oracle Exadata's security features, like TDE encryption, are missing in IBM Netezza Performance Server.

Our main problem with it is concurrency. When there are too many users running Netezza at the same time, this is when we have the most complaints.

Certain database maintenance tasks related to the catalogue need for the database to be offline. Enabling those tasks to be done with the database on-line would be beneficial. Also, the availability of additional SQL and database tuning options would be good.

Could do better to support more concurrent update queries. We had to stagger our ETL loads to prevent queuing of jobs and random failures.

Also, it would have been good if the admin application showed more detail on the validity and usage of zone maps (this may have been implemented in later versions of the admin app).

IBM Netezza Performance Server could improve its interface, support for big data, and APA-based connectivity should be available.

This is an appliance-based product with limited capability. It has all the horse-power that one can imagine and can handle all workloads.

Application development in Netezza is done using SQL scripts and stored procedures. GUI based ETL tools provides higher level of visibility and higher productivity. I hope to see a GUI based application development environment. This could also be achieved through tight integration with an ETL tool, like IBM’s own ETL tool DataStage.

The query optimization is crap, and the machine could use more alerting around bad design and bad queries.

While some queries do run very fast, you cannot load up the box with several queries.

Concurrent Queries, with this model (1000-3), we had a very big problem using front-end tools connected on it. When using a dashboard tool to use data directly from the database, I had a big problem with queries being queued and stopped running. Looking at the manual I read that Netezza has a limited number or concurrent process.

Marketing, I dare say, should be improved. The ads should never mention “big data” since the platform was not initially designed for it.

I worked years and years ago with Teradata, and this is the platform to which it should be compared. It is important to emphasize that Netezza and Teradata have different markets. Netezza performs very well “in its peculiar and valuable small world.”

Netezza is just starting on real time integration with Big Insights (big data). Support for interfaces has been poor. Hoping this improves.

It really serves its purpose. It meets the need for performance, it meets the need for robustness, and it also serves as a perfect data warehousing appliance. The only issue is that it's not expandable.

The new versions of Netezza, they are expandable. They can be on-prem and on the cloud like dashDB from IBM. It replaces the previous Netezza versions. We are currently on Mako because TwinFin support is going in 2019. Maybe in the next couple of years, we will be replacing Netezza with Redshift.

It is a highly complicated architecture and only IBM engineers/support, or someone who worked on the hardware side of the system, can understand the system architecture completely.

This means that:

• Replacements can only be done by an IBM engineer
• Components are not generic and are not on the market
• Many of the systems are IBM patented
• Service support costs are high

Storage, although high, is limited depending on the rack configuration. For example, an N3001-80, which is an eight-rack Mako Server and also the top end model with the highest storage, can store a maximum of 384TB. Should your data exceed this limit, the storage cannot be extended.

It cannot be used for unprocessed data. The data has to be in a table format.

• Correlated queries are not supported.
• Concurrency - the performance dips with number of concurrent queries; for example, if more than 48 queries are run concurrently, it queues up.
• Scalability - if the data increases, you need to go for a bigger appliance as you cannot add to Netezza incrementally.

They should make it work better in a multi-user context. This solution works, but not for the workload we have.

More monitoring tools would be nice. I have found no tools within the tool which help with long running query issues. I would like to see the ability of static binds so access path can be counted on.

Ability to use constraints to enforce uniqueness would be an improvement.

In Aginity there should be a way to format the SQL queries. I think we can't format the query the way we can do it in Oracle editor (beautifier). Say, for example, if we are trying to get the DDL of an existing view, we lost the formatting. It's a minor issue, but important from usability point of view. Other than this, I think we are good so far with Netezza as a whole.

In my opinion the product is the best for the purpose it has been built.

It has already integrated with Big Data Hadoop; however, integration with XML is still not there for nzload utility.If nzlad supports XML files along with flat flies ,it will give them an edge over other MPP Architecture.

Data lineage on column or even object level does not exist, therefore external applications have to be used

It is not designed for transactional systems. Transactional systems that require frequent updates, deletes, etc should use a different solution.

There won't be another release. They're converting to DB2 and that is one of the reasons we are looking at other options.

In terms of features that I would like to see, one is the ability to actually scale out an architecture. Right now, if you buy one, it's fixed. There is no scale-up availability at all.

It should also consider cloud based solutions.

Our overall business intelligence has improved.

It’s a good product for analytical processing, but they need to conduct more seminars and hands-on training and events. They need to be showcasing the product and features to create awareness among businesses.

Concurrency limit needs to be increased somewhat.

Bitemporal support is needed.