Lotus Domino 7 and the DB2 storage option

August 30 2005

So with the Domino 7 code out there today, I'm sure some are wondering what's up with the NSFDB2 feature.  It's not in the shipping code, though it is available.

As I explained at the Irish Lotus User Group last week, this feature did not get exercised sufficiently during Domino 7 beta.  It seems that a number of customers were willing to "kick the tires" during beta, but since the actual Domino 7 server was in beta, didn't go further with converting and testing large numbers of databases.  As a result, given how critical the data store is to overall Domino operations, development chose to take a conservative approach to shipping.  The last thing anyone wants is for a customer to download Domino 7 today, convert a bunch of databases to DB2 tomorrow, and have crit-sits on their hands by Thursday as a result of boundary conditions that were unanticipated or untested.  

Thus, there are two ways of working with NSFDB2 today.  The first is a Limited Availability Program.  This allows customers who are already running DB2 to apply for a special support program around Domino on DB2.  Details about the Limited Availability Program can be found here.

The second option, open to any organization, is the Feature Trial.  By registering for an activation/download key, anyone running Domino 7 can try out the NSFDB2 option.  This Feature Trial is unsupported.  The whole idea is that IBM can track customers using NSFDB2, gather more real-world feedback about how it works, and prepare to officially support the feature at 7.0.x.   Full details and registration for the Feature Trial program are available here. (Update x2: Link updated)

You'll note that there is a new and specific feedback forum for NSFDB2 (link updated).  The development and support organizations are very serious about working with customers during the Trial and Limited Availability programs.  This is a critical feature for Domino 7, and from watching session attendance at Lotusphere, Admin2005, etc., a lot of you are interested.  Let's work together to make it successful.

Ed Brill Highland Park, IL USA Category:  Notes/Domino 7  Add/View Comments [23]

Post a Comment

  1. 1  Greg Walrath http://www.univarusa.com/ | 8/30/2005 1:52:44 PM

    It doesn't look like the Domino 7 DB2 forum is quite there yet.

  1. 2  Ed Brill www.edbrill.com | 8/30/2005 1:56:55 PM

    correct, I'm waiting on a new link.

  1. 3  Neil Gower http://www.dominoconsultants.com | 8/31/2005 3:02:51 AM

    Wow that must have been a difficult decision, but all credit to IBM/Lotus for taking the correct decision to not release the DB2 integration until its really ready...

    With that in mind, what sort of timescale are we looking at, is it in the 7.0.x or 7.5.x timeline. Also will this delay/stop the possibility of support for DB2 on the AS400.

    Ohh and last question, then the DB2 option does ship as part of the base Domino code, will it be simply part of the general server install, or will it always be seperate..

  1. 4  Shawn  | 8/31/2005 9:22:41 AM

    Congratulations !!

    But what IBM trying to prove here by releasing incomplete product?

    Does IBM wants to prove that they always release the product on date promised( Unlike MS)?

    Why customers should waste their time in testing such a product which IBM doesn't have confidence?

    Why IBM thinks that customers will put their valuable resources in with converting and testing large numbers of databases? It looks like IBM dosn't have enough resources to test this.

    It would be better if IBM could delay the release by month or two, QA the product properly, and release complete and solid product in the market.

    By the way what time frame IBM will release complete product? For the time being we don't care about web services , JVM 1.4 or all other new features provided in 7. We are eagrly waiting for DB2 feature and thats what we care most in ND7 but we are not going to waste our resources and time in trying out this feature untill IBM has full confidence in it and release complete product.

  1. 5  Bart Declercq http://www.bart.declerq.easynet.be | 8/31/2005 9:36:26 AM

    @4

    Frankly, I don't understand your problem...

    IBM will release the DB2-component when it's ready. Doing an R7 release now without the DB2 component isn't likely to postpone the DB2-backend release appreciably, and will probably allow more people to thoroughly test the backend before its general release...

    You'd rather other people not get R7 for their needs until the specific part you need is ready?

    Would it help if you pretended ND7 wasn't released yet and then pretend it is released when the DB2 component gets released? That way we can enjoy our ND7 release *now* and you can enjoy it when it becomes "ready" for you...

    If you don't want to 'waste' time testing ND7 now, just wait and test it when the DB2 part is ready, and at that time, you'll also likely be able to enjoy the added stability that comes from a .01 bugfix release...

  1. 6  Ed Brill www.edbrill.com | 8/31/2005 9:48:17 AM

    @4 Well, I see we have a healthy dose of cynicism this morning. :)

    This is one product feature out of hundreds in the ND7 release. Notes 6.0 had a couple of similar features that were held to the first maintenance release. There are customers waiting anxiously for the other features, the ones that are ready to ship. IBM didn't drop this feature, just held it back for more focused testing, in partnership with customers/partners focused on this feature.

    I disagree strongly with the thought that IBM doesn't have enough resources to test this. Why have public beta tests of software at all? The answer is that lab simulations simply can't cover all customer environments and boundary conditions. IBM has enough confidence in the feature to make it available, to support a limited set of customers. You can be disappointed, we all are... but we can still make the best of it by partnering.

  1. 7  Ed Brill www.edbrill.com | 8/31/2005 9:59:06 AM

    @3 - the timeframe planned is 7.0.x, not 7.x. Don't know about how this affects iSeries/400 plans yet, since that still depends on a change to DB2/400. And as far as install, "always" is a long time, so not sure yet.

  1. 8  Bob Warth  | 8/31/2005 10:20:47 AM

    @4

    I understand your disappointment, but I don't follow your logic. I downloaded the gold code and ungraded one of my production servers last night because (i) I was waiting to use a new feature, and (ii) I have confidence that the product *has* been thoroughly tested.

    Obviously needs vary from one customer to the next, but here is one customer that doesn't mind rolling in new features are they become available. In fact my job is easier when features arrive in stages -- like the 7.0 goodies that showed up in the 6.5.4 release. Given the track record for backward compatibility (where applications written under an older release just plain work under each new release) I would encourage more of a rolling feature release Vs big-bang once every x quarters.

  1. 9  david bell  | 8/31/2005 11:05:24 AM

    @4

    It's important to remember that this is the first release of DB2 integration, a major architectural shift for Domino, and while the development team solicited feedback from customers during the beta cycle, very few customers actually implemented DB2 integration and so feedback was somewhat scarce.

    Without a solid foundation of real-world feedback it is difficult to gauge how it will behave, as Ed said, in some of the more esoteric circumstances.

    Also, there is no given that existing Domino customers will have strong DB2 skills. A customer could get into serious trouble if they go move everything to DB2 storage right out of the gate.

    This program allows the development and support folks a better chance at holding some customer's hands as they explore the possibilities.

    Also, this first release has a good set of basic capabilities but there are opportunities to enhance further.

    This program will also help provide future direction.

  1. 10  Shawn  | 8/31/2005 12:43:56 PM

    5) 6) 7) 8) 9)

    I guess you guys are right in this way IBM is not producing Bananaware like DB CM series of products and ILWWCM.

    8) you are right,needs vary from one customer to the another, but its very difficult for many customers to upgrade to new version very next day. Many large size compnies will wait until product becomes real stable. We were eagerly waiting for DB2 feature because this is the one feature which could save out Notes applications moving to other platforms like RDBMS and Ent. Content Mgmt Systems depending on the nature of the applications.

  1. 11  Ed Brill www.edbrill.com | 8/31/2005 12:49:12 PM

    I notice that Paul Robichaux has posted a take on this at { Link }

    I would have left a comment there, but his comments are busticated on both Firefox and IE browsers.

    There -are- in fact hundreds of thousands of mailboxes of Domino 7 already in production. And Domino 7 applications. But a mailbox is explicitly NOT one of the recommended types of applications to convert the back-end to DB2. It's a single user non-joined application, so a lot of the benefits of running on DB2 aren't as critical to a Notes mailbox. So, there was no reason to move those thousands of mailboxes from NSF during beta.

    I'm really unsure what Paul means by "Given the customer uncertainty over the impact of moving to DB2 as part of Workplace,". The move to DB2 for Domino is and has always been clearly identified as OPTIONAL.

  1. 12  Bob Warth  | 8/31/2005 2:25:29 PM

    @10

    We're not exactly tiny -- 6000+ seats affected by the one server I upgraded. The reason I brought up the same-day upgrade is simply that I beleive the code is *already* "real stable".

    Incidentally, my server shutdown completed at 9:34:58 PM; I upgraded to 7, and the server restarted at 9:38:44 PM. Pretty impressive there, IBM.

    @11

    Ed, I didn't expect the naysayers to wait this long to start taking potshots, but aren't there any out there that are more well-thought-out? C'mon, is releasing features as they become ready really a Bad thing? Is M. Robichaux really implying that IBM dosen't "dogfood" their own code? We've been a Notes shop for over a decade and a DB2 shop even longer, but those facts don't dicate adopting the NSFDB2 feature -- only a specific business need in a specific application will do that. To say that we're "uncertain over the impact of moving to DB2" is just silly.

  1. 13  Paul Robichaux http://www.e2ksecurity.com | 8/31/2005 4:08:32 PM

    @11: Ed, I promise there's no Ed-specific comment filter. I just tried commenting in Safari and IE 6 and both comments worked OK (although 'busticated' is a really cromulous adjective!)

    My comment about uncertainty was simple: customers don't know how you actually *execute* the migration. I'm not debating whether or not moving to DB2 is a good idea or not, merely pointing out that the majority of customers have no idea how they would actually perform such a migration.

    However, I think my comment about dogfooding is still fair. If IBM couldn't get a sufficient base of users to thoroughly test the feature, it doesn't seem wise to ship the feature, even in a way that requires a separate enablement. Microsoft has often been criticized in the past for prematurely shipping stuff, which is why I welcome the last three years' emphasis on shipping Exchange revisions and SPs when they hit predefined uptime targets-- not when a calendar date approaches.

    @12: I guess we disagree on whether this particular feature is ready or not.

    (Side note: who thought up a name like "Limited Availability Program"? That's as bad as the MS folks who come up with names like WM5MSFP ({ Link }

  1. 14  Ed Brill www.edbrill.com | 8/31/2005 4:47:06 PM

    @13 - the conversion (not migration) of an NSF to DB2 is pretty simple -- file | database | new copy.

    The reason it's not a migration -- you can have the same Notes app stored in multiple formats across servers. So, one replica can be DB2 and another NSF. Thus, it's not a migration, which implies a one-way door.

  1. 15  david bell  | 9/1/2005 10:45:25 AM

    Compact -p database.nsf puts moves the NSF into DB2. Very very easy.

  1. 16  Rob Ingram  | 9/1/2005 4:48:30 PM

    @13 - believe us we tried all sorts of other names. 'Limited Availability' term stuck because the term and process is used for other IBM products.

  1. 17  Gerco Wolfswinkel http://www.domino-weblog.nl | 9/2/2005 5:40:51 AM

    @14 - you can also migrate .nsf to DB2 by doing a compact -p.

  1. 18  Lars Olufsen  | 9/2/2005 9:27:05 AM

    Is it just me, or does this severely compromise Ambuj Goyal's statement about 'Shipping what we promise'?

    This is very sad news to read on a blog that on the same page has a story about the promised - but still lacking - features of Exchange.

    From a platform-oriented point of view, I see little in the current Domino 7 release that would prompt me to upgrade now instead of waiting until 7.0.x for the DB2 integration, especially if you're already on a 6.5.x version.

    Why in such a hurry to 'go gold' on v7 ?

  1. 19  Ed Brill www.edbrill.com | 9/2/2005 9:55:32 AM

    Lars, I think the answer is in #5 and #8 comments above. There are hundreds of other new features in ND7, and some of them are making an immediate impact in the market. The DB2 feature -is- shipping, and if you need it, you can apply for the program for customer support. It's just something to be cautious on, not something that was dropped in any way.

  1. 20  Lars Olufsen  | 9/19/2005 6:03:04 AM

    A tiny bit of feedback from me is warranted here.

    Now, I've had the opportunity to migrate a test-server to ND7, and I do recognize that a LOT of new features make it a worthy release - even without the emphasis on DB2.

  1. 21  Larry www.ivetesangalo.com | 9/25/2005 11:41:02 AM

    Dear Ed,

    Would there have been more testers if it had been MySQL in stead of DB2?

  1. 22  Philip Storry http://www.not-so-rapid.com | 9/25/2005 6:01:56 PM

    Larry [21],

    Why would MySQL have gotten more testers? MySQL may have a good name through quick setup and fast performance for lightweight usage, but that's about it.

    You could ask the same question an replace DB2 with Oracle, SQL Server, PostgreSQL... Each has its merits, each has its detractors.

    People didn't test it because people have data they want. This is a catch-22 situation - IBM wants it tested on real-world large data sets which are read and written to frequently. Yet anyone with a data set like that probably has it labelled "mission critical", or at the very least "very important" - and they don't want to risk their data.

    The name of the RDBMS being used is irrelevant. In my organisation, we're an MS SQL Server shop. If I said "Hey, let's use DB2", there would be some concern - but not over the fact that it's DB2. More over the fact that I'd be proposing to move some of my large, frequently updated databases (domlog.nsf, anyone?) to a new DB format, and if it crashes it will take out applications or perhaps even a whole server. Not to mention the data. Uptime and data security are taken seriously here...

    Ultimately, it's DB2 because it simplifies licensing and development for IBM - it'd be harder to work with a third party company at such a low level, and the lawyers would have a field day. Using something else would probably have made the alternate data store an R8 release item, and I personally think anything that wasn't DB2/SQL Server/Oracle would probably have elicited even less testers due to a lack of industry track record and recognition.

    But I'd be interested to hear why you think MySQL would be a good choice for this kind of feature...

  1. 23  Israel Apaza  | 6/11/2006 4:52:49 PM

    Please, where i can download documentation for configuration or installation about Lotus Domino 7 and the DB2 storage?.

    Thanks