Apache Spark Reviews

We use it for data engineering and analytics to process and examine extensive datasets.

It is highly scalable, allowing you to efficiently work with extensive datasets that might be problematic to handle using traditional tools that are memory-constrained.

One limitation is that not all machine learning libraries and models support it. While libraries like Scikit-learn may work with some Spark-compatible models, not all machine-learning tools are compatible with Spark. In such cases, you may need to extract data from Spark and train your models on smaller datasets instead of directly using Spark for training.

I have been using it for four years.

I have not encountered any significant stability issues and it has proven to be a robust and reliable platform without major crashes. However, there have been instances where I needed to address query optimization and similar tasks to ensure optimal performance. I would rate it nine out of ten.

To rate my overall experience, I would give it an eight out of ten, leaving room for potential improvements in terms of technical support.

Positive

We used Pandas data frames and SQL-type queries for smaller datasets, but we haven't worked with anything on the scale of Spark SQL.

I haven't handled the deployment process, but setting it up on the cloud seems relatively straightforward.

Setting it up on-premises might take longer, potentially a couple of days. However, when deploying it on the cloud, the process can be significantly quicker, possibly taking only a few hours.

On the cloud model can be expensive as it requires substantial resources for implementation, covering on-premises hardware, memory, and licensing. Managing costs in a cloud environment can be challenging due to the cumulative expenses associated with running and maintaining Spark. Licensing costs may not be the primary concern, but operational costs in the cloud can add up. For on-premises deployments, maintenance costs include cluster management, job optimization, and upgrades. In the cloud, maintenance costs are relatively lower, especially with managed database clusters, but they still exist and primarily revolve around cluster upkeep.

We evaluated Microsoft Synapse, which offers similar analytics functionality but not quite at the same scale as Apache Spark and Spark as a whole. While some tasks can be accomplished with Synapse on AWS, there are certain features and capabilities, such as micro-batching and scalability, that Spark excels at and remains unmatched.

Additional skill requirements are crucial to use the solution and its related features effectively. Training costs and efforts may be necessary to ensure individuals are proficient in using these technologies. Overall, I would rate it nine out of ten.

We use it as an ETL tool to gather information from different systems. The product is useful for analytics.

The product could improve the user interface and make it easier for new users. It has a steep learning curve.

I have been using the product for approximately three to four years. Currently, I am using the latest version.

The tool is stable. I rate the stability a ten out of ten.

The tool is very scalable. I rate the scalability a ten out of ten. Approximately 30 users are using Apache Spark in our organization.

We are using the free version of the product. So, we are not using any support.

Positive

The basic installation is easy. However, we are working in the security business and need a very secure installation. It has been quite difficult. I rate the basic installation a ten out of ten. I rate the ease of setup a two or three out of ten for a more secure installation with all the security features. The solution is deployed on-premises in our organization. The deployment process requires a couple of weeks.

We are using the free version of the solution.

I would recommend the product. I think it's a good solution for analytics. Overall, I rate the product an eight out of ten.

We use the product in our environment for data processing and performing Data Definition Language (DDL) operations.

The product’s most valuable features are lazy evaluation and workload distribution.

They could improve the issues related to programming language for the platform. 

We have been using Apache Spark for around two and a half years.

The platform’s stability depends on how effectively we write the code. We encountered a few issues related to programming languages.

We have more than 100 Apache Spark users in our organization.

Before choosing Apache Spark for processing big data, we evaluated another option, Hadoop. However, Spark emerged as a superior choice comparatively.

The initial setup complexity depends on whether it's on the cloud or on-premise. For cloud deployments, especially using platforms like Databricks, the process is straightforward and can be configured with ease. However, if the deployment is on-premise, the setup tends to be more time-consuming, although not overly complex.

They provide an open-source license for the on-premise version. However, we have to pay for the cloud version including data centers and virtual machines.

Apache Spark is a good product for processing large volumes of data compared to other distributed systems. It provides efficient integration with Hadoop and other platforms.

I rate it a ten out of ten.

We use the product for extensive data analysis. It helps us analyze a huge amount of data and transfer it to data scientists in our organization.

The product’s most valuable feature is the SQL tool. It enables us to create a database and publish it. It is a useful feature for us.

At the initial stage, the product provides no container logs to check the activity. It remains inactive for a long time without giving us any information. The containers could start quickly, similar to that of Jupyter Notebook.

We have been using Apache Spark for eight months to one year.

It is a stable product. I rate its stability an eight out of ten.

We have 45 Apache Spark users. I rate its scalability a nine out of ten.

The complexity of the initial setup depends on the kind of environment an organization is working with. It requires one executive for deployment. I rate the process an eight out of ten.

The product is expensive, considering the setup. However, from a standalone perspective, it is inexpensive.

I advise others to analyze data and understand your business requirements before purchasing the product. I rate it an eight out of ten.

We use Apache Spark for storage and processing.

The most valuable feature of Apache Spark is its flexibility.

Apache Spark's GUI and scalability could be improved.

I have been using Apache Spark for four to five years.

Around 15 data scientists are using Apache Spark in our organization.

Apache Spark's initial setup is slightly complex compared to other other solutions. Data scientists could install our previous tools with minimal supervision, whereas Apache Spark requires some IT support. Apache Spark's installation is a time-consuming process because it requires ensuring that all the ports have been accessed properly following certain guidelines.

While installing Apache Spark, I must look at the documentation and be very specific about the configuration settings. Only then I'll be able to install it.

Apache Spark is an expensive solution.

I would recommend Apache Spark to other users.

Overall, I rate Apache Spark an eight out of ten.

Our customers configure their software applications, and I use Apache to check them. We use it for data processing.

The data processing framework is good. The product is very useful.

The solution must improve its performance.

I have been using the solution for four to five years.

The tool is stable. I rate the stability more than nine out of ten.

We have a small business. Around four people in my organization use the solution.

The deployment was easy.

The solution was deployed with the help of third-party consultants.

Overall, I rate the product more than eight out of ten.

Predominantly, I use Spark for data analysis on top of datasets containing tens of millions of records.

I have an example. We had a single-threaded application that used to run for about four to five hours, but with Spark, it got reduced to under one hour.

The distribution of tasks, like the seamless map-reduce functionality, is quite impressive. For the user, it appears as simple single-line data manipulations, but behind the scenes, the executor pool intelligently distributes the map and reduce functions.

The visualization could be improved.

I have been working with Apache Spark for only a few months, not too long.

I haven't faced any stability issues. It has been stable in my experience.

When it comes to the scalability of Spark, it's primarily a processing engine, not a database engine. I haven't tested it extensively with large record sizes.

In my organization, quite a few people are using Spark. In my smaller team, there are only two users.

In terms of maintenance, when the load hits around 95%, we need to prioritize scripts and analysis within the team. 

We coordinate and prioritize based on the available resources. If there were self-service tools or better hand-holding for such situations, it would make things easier.

Currently, we extensively use pandas and Polaris. We are leveraging Docker and Kubernetes as a framework, along with AWS Batch for distribution. This is the closest substitute we have for Spark Distribution.

Both Docker and Kubernetes are more general-purpose solutions. If someone is already using Kubernetes and it's provided as a service, it can be used for special-purpose utilization, similar to Docker and Kubernetes.

In such cases, users may need to write the parallelization logic themselves, but it's relatively easy to onboard and start with a distributed load. Spark, on the other hand, is primarily used for special-purpose utilization. Users typically choose Spark when they have data-intensive tasks.

Another significant issue with Spark is its syntactics. For instance, if we have libraries like Panda or Polaris, we can run them single-threaded on a single core, or we can distribute them leveraging Kubernetes.

We don't need to rewrite that code base for Spark. However, if we are writing code specifically for Spark Executors, it will not be amenable to running it locally.

I would recommend understanding the use case better. Only if it fits your use case, then go for it. But it is a great tool.

Overall, I would rate Apache Spark an eight out of ten. 

We use Spark for machine learning applications, clustering, and segmentation of customers.

Apache provides a lot of good documentation compared to other solutions. 

The migration of data between different versions could be improved. 

I've been using this solution for four years. 

The solution is stable. 

The solution is scalable. 

If you pay for customer support then you get a quick and efficient response, otherwise the community support offers good help. 

The initial setup has been simplified over the past few years and is now relatively straightforward. 

Licensing costs depend on where you source the solution. 

This is a good solution for big data use cases and I rate it eight out of 10.