EDB Postgres Advanced Server vs. IBM Cloud Databases

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
EDB Postgres Advanced Server
Score 10.0 out of 10
N/A
The EDB Postgres Advanced Server is an advanced deployment of the PostgreSQL relational database with greater features and Oracle compatibility, from EnterpriseDB headquartered in Bedford, Massachusetts.N/A
IBM Cloud Databases
Score 8.6 out of 10
N/A
IBM Cloud Databases are open source data stores for enterprise application development. Built on a Kubernetes foundation, they offer a database platform for serverless applications. They are designed to scale storage and compute resources seamlessly without being constrained by the limits of a single server. Natively integrated and available in the IBM Cloud console, these databases are now available through a consistent consumption, pricing, and interaction model. They aim to provide a cohesive…N/A
Pricing
EDB Postgres Advanced ServerIBM Cloud Databases
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
EDB Postgres Advanced ServerIBM Cloud Databases
Free Trial
NoNo
Free/Freemium Version
NoNo
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup fee
Additional Details
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
EDB Postgres Advanced ServerIBM Cloud Databases
Considered Both Products
EDB Postgres Advanced Server
Chose EDB Postgres Advanced Server
We chose Postgres Plus Advanced Server because we had the finances to do so and needed the robust featureset, along with the power to optimize our performance and integrate with the development tools of our choosing. We audited a number of options, exploring potential solutions …
Chose EDB Postgres Advanced Server
PPAS proved better for our customer's data-centric apps than Oracle in all but a few edge cases (encryption at rest and multi-TB database-tier backups) because it is simpler to install/maintain, runs nearly all Oracle-syntax SQL as well as ANSI SQL.
PPAS has much more JSON …
IBM Cloud Databases
Chose IBM Cloud Databases
N/A for other services, but used IBM because of reputation as it is an industry giant who has been a big player in the IT industry for years.
Chose IBM Cloud Databases
a powerful storm disrupted power supplies and network connections to the data center hosting our critical databases. Despite the external factors causing widespread service disruptions, IBM Cloud Databases demonstrated its exceptional reliability. The auto-failover feature …
Chose IBM Cloud Databases
UI is easier to use and flexible. AWS EBS is very simple to use and do upgrades and monitor the upgrades easily. I also recommend IBM to implement these.
Chose IBM Cloud Databases
The reason why I choose IBM Cloud Databases is that the IBM cloud toolset is already being used in other functions of the company and by using IBM Cloud Databases, the other cloud tools are better embedded and integrated. If the company is set to use amazon tools, I would go …
Chose IBM Cloud Databases
IBM cloud database has a lot of features than amazon dynamodb. This is my personal opinion. But I can't say amazon dynamodb is a bad one. But IBM cloud database has a lot of securities and file storage and backup features than amazon dynamodb. But both are good in their own …
Chose IBM Cloud Databases
I have used Amazon DynamoDm and compared to IBM Compose, I would say IBM Compose is affordable, easy to use and very fast as well. I would opt IBM Cloud Databases given the two choices
Chose IBM Cloud Databases
No I haven't yet used other ones more so can't make a judgement
Chose IBM Cloud Databases
We started with IBM Compose, which later got merged into and became IBM Cloud Databases.
Chose IBM Cloud Databases
they do a great job at handling our business needs. we like what they offer and how they respond to questions we provide. they do a lot of great things that help our business thrive and stay ahead. we are grateful for how this compnay has responded to our unique requests and …
Chose IBM Cloud Databases
We already had existing contracts with IBM and Microsoft, so those made the most sense to verify. Both are good options for data storage. Since much of our existing Dbs are IBM related, we stuck with IBM cloud dbs, just so that the SQL code would port well. Additionally, we …
Chose IBM Cloud Databases
The kubernete service is the front end for the transactions of our core systems and our cloud databases (Postgres and DB2) are the persistence storage.

It is very similar to the way on which we operated before except that we don't have to worry about high availability, backups …
Chose IBM Cloud Databases
AWS RDS & Oracle OCI. AWS RDS has a wider range of databases but at a higher cost.
IBM Compose has fewer databases but is perfect for data related solutions like data warehousing (IBM Db2 AI enabled Warehouse is a GREAT product!)
Chose IBM Cloud Databases
Cloudant is HIPAA compliant and replicated out of the box. We recommend use of Cloudant vs Mongodb for that purpose. We use Redis only as a session cache.
Chose IBM Cloud Databases
We are still evaluating the differences between IBM Cloud Databases and AWS Postgres instances.
Chose IBM Cloud Databases
We have Cassandra database that is currently not available as part of IBM Cloud Databases. We ended up using classic infrastructure IaaS to host our Cassandra server.
Chose IBM Cloud Databases
I did compare IBM Compose for PostgreSQL with PostgreSQL offerings available from Amazon and Google. IBM Compose was judged easier to provision and maintain.

I'm pleased with the additional more granular provisioning flexibility and more favorable cost structure that has come …
Chose IBM Cloud Databases
Solr was not available on Compose and had to be hosted internally
Chose IBM Cloud Databases
While at the time, Amazon RDS did/does not create Mongo databases, I was able to set up many with PostgreSQL databases with the same ease as IBM Compose. However, IBM compose does seem to offer a more intuitive application control panel. Amazon RDS costs run on a server …
Chose IBM Cloud Databases
We selected Compose because we initially thought that they would provide great support, and that they would bring encryption at rest within months. That has not materialized yet.

We also thought that the cost, while far from being the lowest, was reasonable.
Chose IBM Cloud Databases
I've tried Amazon DynamoDB and Heroku Postgres, but Compose was much much easier and faster to set up, and also has more DB alternatives.
Chose IBM Cloud Databases
Aiven backup options are very limited (you can't download backups and you don't have an API) and their dashboard is incomplete and without an optimal design; but they accept way more data centers, and they have more pricing options.
Features
EDB Postgres Advanced ServerIBM Cloud Databases
Database-as-a-Service
Comparison of Database-as-a-Service features of Product A and Product B
EDB Postgres Advanced Server
-
Ratings
IBM Cloud Databases
7.0
Ratings
21% below category average
Automatic software patching00 Ratings8.50 Ratings
Database scalability00 Ratings8.50 Ratings
Automated backups00 Ratings6.80 Ratings
Database security provisions00 Ratings8.70 Ratings
Monitoring and metrics00 Ratings4.20 Ratings
Automatic host deployment00 Ratings5.20 Ratings
Best Alternatives
EDB Postgres Advanced ServerIBM Cloud Databases
Small Businesses
InterSystems IRIS
InterSystems IRIS
Score 7.7 out of 10
IBM Cloudant
IBM Cloudant
Score 7.4 out of 10
Medium-sized Companies
InterSystems IRIS
InterSystems IRIS
Score 7.7 out of 10
IBM Cloudant
IBM Cloudant
Score 7.4 out of 10
Enterprises
SAP IQ
SAP IQ
Score 10.0 out of 10
IBM Cloudant
IBM Cloudant
Score 7.4 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
EDB Postgres Advanced ServerIBM Cloud Databases
Likelihood to Recommend
10.0
(0 ratings)
8.1
(0 ratings)
Likelihood to Renew
-
(0 ratings)
8.0
(0 ratings)
Usability
-
(0 ratings)
7.0
(0 ratings)
Support Rating
-
(0 ratings)
1.0
(0 ratings)
User Testimonials
EDB Postgres Advanced ServerIBM Cloud Databases
Likelihood to Recommend
Very well suited to applications mixing relational with NoSQL and/or complex data types, such as network analysis, JSON, key-value-pair, etc. Excellent if you have multiple programming languages in use (Python, Perl, R, etc.) because PPAS supports so many languages natively. Not well suited if you need encryption at rest, compressed data or very large database-tier backups. [Large backups should be done at the storage tier if possible.]
Read full review
Less Appropriate Scenario: 1) Small Scale or Low Budget Projects 2) Organizations with limited expertise in cloud technologies may find the learning curve steep, especially if they are not familiar with the IBM Cloud platform 3) If database requirements are highly dynamic and change frequently, the comprehensive features and management provided by IBM Cloud Databases might be overkill. A more flexible, self-managed solution could be preferable for adapting to rapid changes.
Read full review
Pros
  • PPAS Oracle compatibility, especially the PL/SQL syntax, has made migrating database-tier code very simple. Most Oracle packages do not need to be changed at all and those that do are generally for simple reasons like a reserved word in PPAS that is allowed in Oracle.
  • PPAS xDB, the multi-master replication tool, is simple and - most important - does not break with network or other interruptions. We have been able to configure and forget, which our customers could never do with other multi-master tools.
  • Most people had no idea that PPAS and PostgreSQL have full CRUD support for JSON. They think you need a specialized product and/or that JSON is read-only. Every organization that I have worked with is evaluating adding JSON to their relational model.
Read full review
  • The ease of setup was effortless. For anyone with development experience, a few simple questions such as name and login data will get you set up.
  • The web application to manage cluster settings, billing settings and even introspect the data was simple and most importantly worked all the time. This can not always be said for web interfaces of other products.
Read full review
Cons
  • Documentation is excellent but spread out across many resources and can take a while to wade through—would benefit from having more intro level, getting started guides for various languages.
  • Ruby support is excellent but more Ruby examples and beginner-level documentation would be nice.
  • It is sometimes hard to find a community of users on StackOverflow so a larger community, and a dedicated forum with active members to answer questions and work through issues would be nice.
Read full review
  • Better cost reports, before just increasing to another tier, thus increasing the price. This is critical for early stage startups, where budget is tight.
  • Add more data center options. As a comparison, a similar service, Aiven.io has dozen more options than Compose (basically all big cloud providers). We moved from AWS to Digital Ocean, which made us stop using Compose, since Compose forces us to be either on IBM or AWS.
Read full review
Likelihood to Renew
No answers on this topic
I am very fond of the features and reliability of the compose DaaS, however I could switch if I find same qualities for lower price.
Read full review
Usability
No answers on this topic
IBM Cloud Databases' pricing structure is easy to understand, and if you choose the right product, you can operate your system at minimal cost. Although there is ample documentation available, there doesn't seem to be a user community running on it, so specific usage know-how and troubleshooting can sometimes take longer than expected.
Read full review
Support Rating
No answers on this topic
Support is helpful enough, but we haven't always had questions answered in a satisfactory manner. At one time we realized that Compose had stopped taking database snapshots on its two-per-day schedule, and had in fact not taken one for many days. Support recognized the problem and it was fixed, but the lack of proactive checks and the inability to share exactly what happened has caused us to look elsewhere for production work loads
Read full review
Alternatives Considered
We chose Postgres Plus Advanced Server because we had the finances to do so and needed the robust featureset, along with the power to optimize our performance and integrate with the development tools of our choosing. We audited a number of options, exploring potential solutions at various levels of robustness and decided that this was our best option moving forward.
Read full review
The reason why I choose IBM Cloud Databases is that the IBM cloud toolset is already being used in other functions of the company and by using IBM Cloud Databases, the other cloud tools are better embedded and integrated. If the company is set to use amazon tools, I would go for rds.
Read full review
Return on Investment
  • Postgres Plus Advanced Server is quite complex and may take longer to implement certain things than simply using PostgreSQL depending on developer familiarity with the platform.
  • Getting up to speed can be daunting so again, there is an upfront cost in time spent learning the platform, besides the potential for extra time spent on a feature-by-feature basis.
  • The cost of Postgres Plus Advanced Server should be weighed against simply using PostgreSQL to decide which is the best solution for your business needs.
Read full review
  • Prove use cases prior to administering entire platform, obtain ROI faster
  • Able to achieve the technological components of our advanced analytics team without full scale purchase of AI platform
  • Developed several studies to prove out cloud Db value, speed to deploy
Read full review
ScreenShots