Integration
This is an IBM Automation portal for Integration products. To view all of your ideas submitted to IBM, create and manage groups of Ideas, or create an idea explicitly set to be either visible by all (public) or visible only to you and IBM (private), use the IBM Unified Ideas Portal (https://ideas.ibm.com).
Shape the future of IBM!
We invite you to shape the future of IBM, including product roadmaps, by submitting ideas that matter to you the most. Here's how it works:
Search existing ideas
Start by searching and reviewing ideas and requests to enhance a product or service. Take a look at ideas others have posted, and add a comment, vote, or subscribe to updates on them if they matter to you. If you can't find what you are looking for,
Post your ideas
Post an idea.
Get feedback from the IBM team and other customers to refine your idea.
Follow the idea through the IBM Ideas process.
Specific links you will want to bookmark for future use
Welcome to the IBM Ideas Portal (https://www.ibm.com/ideas) - Use this site to find out additional information and details about the IBM Ideas process and statuses.
IBM Unified Ideas Portal (https://ideas.ibm.com) - Use this site to view all of your ideas, create new ideas for any IBM product, or search for ideas across all of IBM.
ideasibm@us.ibm.com - Use this email to suggest enhancements to the Ideas process or request help from IBM for submitting your Ideas.
It is true that the databases supported are quite restrictive. I'd also like to see more lightweight options, particularly when ACE runs on a development environment, where it is untypical to have a local installation of DB2, Oracle or even MSSQL. Support for MySQL/Maria DB would be great, can even think of an in-memory implementation. Certainly willing to compromise on the number of records kept as well as transactionality.
Yes, I have had at least one client that wanted to use SQL Server with BTM. This would be good to see included.
Thanks for update.
This is still a valid request, because the much-welcomed support for BTM inside ACE V12 still requires a database, and that must still be either DB2 and Oracle. But more and more customers do not use DB2 or Oracle, and thus cannot take advantage of BTM without buying DB2 or Oracle.
These days, of course, this may be an opportunity to sell IBM DB2 in IBM Cloud to provide the database - and I'd be interested in your comments about the performance implications.
However, many customers already have their own Database solution (be it traditional PostGre or SQLServer, or more modern Cloudant or MongoDB) and are reluctant to add DB2 or Oracle in whatever form.
I find it very difficult to identify the potential negative impact to IBM of not supporting more databases. It is unlikely to result in greatly reduced sales of ACE. However, BTM demos particularly well as another reason to buy ACE over competition, and if we as customer-facing sellers then have to add the caveat that only DB2/Oracle are supported then it reduces the impact.
Idea / RFE Review. Apologies for the length of time this suggestion has been held in the status of Future Consideration. In more recent releases, BTM was not available in ACEv11 but has subsequently been re-introduced in ACEv12, and it is also likely that in future we will extend database support as requested. Status of the idea has been maintained as Future Consideration, but is currently classified as Under Review for inclusion in a later v12 mod release.
Thanks for taking the time to raise this RFE. We agree that this would make an excellent enhancement to the Business Transaction Monitoring feature. As you may be aware, when we first brought the Record & Replay feature to the product we started with a reduced set of database support in order to be confident that full scenario testing against the databases was successful before extending support further. We have subsequently expanded support for R&R to also include SQL Server and we would expect to take a similar step in future for BTM in a future IIB fix pack / release. In fact when designing the feature we architected with this future enhancement in mind (SQL Server connection will be via ODBC). The status of this RFE is now updated to Uncommitted Candidate in acknowledgement that we agree in principle with the idea and the Use Case is clearly stated so we have a good understanding of implementation specifics.