Canonical: https://molo17.com/blog/molo17-gluesync-vs-fivetran-hvr-ibm-i-systems/ Markdown mirror: https://molo17.com/blog/molo17-gluesync-vs-fivetran-hvr-ibm-i-systems/index.md Title: IBM i Data Integration: Gluesync vs HVR Performance Comparison Description: Compare IBM i data integration solutions: Gluesync [← All articles](/blog/) Article # Gluesync vs Fivetran’s HVR: the superior IBM i data integration solution 23 Jan 2025 [Gluesync](/blog/?category=gluesync) 4 min read When it comes to real-time data integration on IBM i systems (formerly AS/400), businesses need a platform that delivers top-tier performance, low resource consumption, and scalable capabilities. MOLO17’s Gluesync \[…\]  When it comes to real-time data integration on IBM i systems (formerly AS/400), businesses need a platform that delivers **top-tier performance**, **low resource consumption**, and **scalable capabilities**. **MOLO17’s Gluesync** and **Fivetran’s HVR are prominent players in this field**. While both solutions enable data replication and synchronization for IBM i systems, **Gluesync** offers significant advantages that make it the preferred choice for enterprises looking to optimize their IBM i infrastructure. This article examines the **key differences** between **Gluesync** and **HVR**, highlighting why MOLO17’s solution outshines its competitor in terms of **performance**, **resource impact**, and **scalability**. ## Resource impact: Gluesync’s ultra-low footprint vs. HVR’s heavy CPU usage One of the primary challenges when integrating IBM i systems is managing **resource consumption**, particularly **CPU usage** and **CPWs (Commercial Processing Workloads)**. A solution that minimizes resource impact is essential for maintaining system performance and controlling operational costs. ### Fivetran’HVR: high CPU impact Fivetran relies on the DISPLAY\_JOURNAL SQL function to retrieve journal entries from IBM i systems. While functional, this approach can **consume up to 40% of CPU resources** during operation per connection. This high level of resource usage can significantly hinder the performance of mission-critical applications running on IBM i systems. ### MOLO17’s Gluesync: minimal impact In contrast, Gluesync by MOLO17 leverages **native AS/400 commands** to fetch journal entries directly. By avoiding the resource-hogging DISPLAY\_JOURNAL function, Gluesync achieves an **ultra-low CPU footprint**, consuming **only 5% CPU for less than 0.5 seconds** to process 10,000 journal entries on a shared pool of 15 connections. _**The Bottom Line**_ Gluesync minimizes resource consumption, ensuring that IBM i systems can continue to perform at their best. Fivetran, on the other hand, risks overburdening your system, leading to higher costs and reduced efficiency. ## Scalability: Gluesync’s support for multiple journals Many IBM i environments utilize **multiple journals** to manage data replication across different applications and tables. The ability to handle these journals effectively is crucial for scalability. ### Fivetran’s HVR: Limited to One Journal Fivetranis is restricted to handling **one journal** per configuration. This limitation forces businesses to create and manage multiple configurations for each journal, increasing complexity and administrative overhead. ### MOLO17’s Gluesync: unlimited journal support Gluesync, on the other hand, supports **unlimited journals** on IBM i systems. Businesses can configure and manage multiple journals within the same environment, streamlining the integration process and enabling seamless scalability. _**The Bottom Line**_ Gluesync’s ability to handle multiple journals makes it **ideal for enterprises** with large-scale IBM i environments. Fivetran’s one-journal limitation adds unnecessary complexity and constrains scalability. ## Native Integration: optimized for IBM i systems IBM i systems have unique architecture and capabilities that require a platform specifically optimized for their environment. ### Fivetran’s HVR: generic SQL-based approach HVR uses SQL-based methods, such as DISPLAY\_JOURNAL, to retrieve data. While effective in basic scenarios, this approach introduces **overhead** and fails to fully leverage the native features of IBM i systems. ### MOLO17’s Gluesync: tailored for IBM i Gluesync is designed specifically for IBM i systems, using **native commands** to interact directly with the journal subsystem. This approach ensures: - **Faster synchronization** with minimal latency. - **Reduced overhead** compared to SQL-based methods. - **Seamless integration** with IBM i’s journaling system for reliable Change Data Capture (CDC). _**The Bottom Line**_ Gluesync’s native integration with IBM i systems provides performance and reliability that Fivetran cannot match. ## Performance benchmarks: real-world results Benchmarking\* Gluesync vs. HVR reveals the stark differences in their performance: **Metric** **Gluesync** **Fivetran’s HVR** **CPU impact** 5% for <1 second (10,000 entries) up to 40% with DISPLAY\_JOURNAL **Support for journals** unlimited single journal only **Scalability** designed for large environments limited by journaling restrictions **Data latency** ultra-low latency higher latency due to SQL APIs overhead \*Benchmark and performance results for **IBM i 7.5 systems with 25660 CPW**. ## Conclusion: why Gluesync is the superior choice For businesses relying on IBM i systems, **MOLO17’s Gluesync** delivers a combination of **performance**, **scalability**, and **efficiency** that Fivetran’s HVR simply cannot match. By choosing Gluesync, organizations can: - **minimize resource impact**, ensuring their IBM i systems run at peak performance. - **scale effortlessly** with support for multiple journals. - **leverage IBM i’s native capabilities** for optimized data integration. **Ready to optimize your IBM i data integration?** [Learn more about](https://molo17.com/docs/gluesync/v2.0/agents/ibm-i-series-intro.html) [](https://molo17.com/docs/gluesync/v2.0/agents/ibm-i-series-intro.html)[Gluesync for IBM i here](https://molo17.com/docs/gluesync/v2.0/agents/ibm-i-series-intro.html). ### **Why Choose MOLO17’s Gluesync?** - **Efficient resource usage:** avoid the heavy CPU impact of SQL-based methods. - **Scalable architecture:** unlimited journal support for large environments. - **Native integration:** tailored for IBM i systems for superior performance. Upgrade your IBM i integration with **MOLO17’s Gluesync** today! _Disclaimer: The logo of HVR used in this article is the property of the company itself. All rights to the logo are retained by the owner company itself and the use is strictly for illustrative purposes in the context of the blog post by MOLO17._ [← Older article Gluesync 2.0.3: latest release brings a game-changing monitoring hub and 90% performance boost](/blog/gluesync-2-0-3-latest-release/) [Newer article → Real-time Data synchronization: a leading indian bank partners with MOLO17 to revolutionize their data infrastructure](/blog/indian-bank-real-time-data-synchronization/) ## Keep reading 1. [Gluesync Event-driven integration with Chronos: webhooks and platform events Eliminate polling overhead with Chronos webhooks and platform events. Dynamically trigger Gluesync pipelines using external HTTP callouts or native Core Hub state changes. 5 Aug 2026](/blog/event-driven-integration-with-chronos-webhooks-and-platform-events/) 2. [Gluesync Why OIDC integration in Gluesync 2.2.7 is a game-changer for enterprise data security Gluesync 2.2.7 introduces native OIDC integration. 15 Jun 2026](/blog/why-oidc-integration-in-gluesync-2-2-7-is-a-game-changer-for-enterprise-data-security/) 3. [Gluesync Introducing Gluesync 2.2: elevating real-time data integration with a new plugin-based architecture and enterprise scalability Gluesync 2.2 introduces a new plugin-based architecture, reduced resource usage and a new Windows MSI installer. 6 Mar 2026](/blog/gluesync-2-2/) [Back to all articles](/blog/) [More in Gluesync →](/blog/?category=gluesync)