AWS Glue Reviews

My colleagues work with Spark, PySpark, and Scala as programming languages for writing complex aggregations. They have a repository in order to have a general view of all the sources and jobs on the platform and AWS Glue is very helpful.

AWS Glue is a good solution for developers, they have the ability to write code in different languages and other software.

The interface for AWS Glue could improve, they do not put a lot of details. You can write the code, in PySpark or in Scala, which is a big advantage, it is only easy to use for a developer. It will be difficult for new users to enter the cloud environment.

If business users want to run their own graphs they will not have the opportunity to use such features, such as running code inside AWS Glue in Spark, which will be complex for them.

 I have been using AWS Glue for approximately four years.

AWS Glue is a highly stable solution. We didn't have bugs in production. 

The solution works well with Spark, which is a good framework for large volumes of data. It operates very well.

I rate the stability of AWS Glue a ten out of ten.

The scalability of AWS Glue is great. It was used for enterprise customers. We worked a lot with AWS Glue for International companies.

We have approximately 10 people using AWS Glue in my company.

I have to use the support from AWS Glue. The response time could improve.

I rate the support from AWS Glue a nine out of ten.

Positive

The initial setup of AWS Glue is very simple.

AWS Glue uses a pay-as-you-go approach which is helpful. The price of the overall solution is low and is a great advantage.

If I can compare AWS Glue to other solutions, it has the advantage of the cloud, which assures availability and scalability, and the pay-as-you-go is beneficial. This is why many companies are moving from their traditional ETL tools to the cloud because the costs will be reduced dramatically.

I would recommend this solution to others.

I rate AWS Glue a nine out of ten.

The best feature is the price point. It's pretty cheap as compared to other tools like Informatica, et cetera. That's why major companies are moving to the cloud and using Glue. At least, that's what I found.

The solution is stable and reliable.

You can scale the product if you need to. 

The monitoring is not that good. We'd like to see job progress be more clear. Right now, how we can view that is not that good. The is that mostly it is Python or Scala code based. The UX is lacking.

There is a bit of a learning curve, particularly during the setup process. 

More connectors should be included.

I've been using the solution for three years. 

The solution is very reliable. It's stable. There are no bugs or glitches It works just fine. 

The solution can scale very well. It's not a problem.

Technical support is okay. We tend to go to the partner if we have issues, and they'll go to WS if they need to.

I'm also familiar with Informatica. However, Glue is less expensive. 

In terms of the initial setup, the learning part was a little bit stiff. After that, it is okay. We didn't have any issues once we understood the process. 

We didn't require any outside assistance such as integrators or consultants. We were able to handle it ourselves. 

The price is very good. It's enticing people to move to the cloud. 

That said, I do not have exact information on pricing. 

I'm an AWS engineer. My company is a gold partner.

I'd rate the product eight out of ten. So far, it's quite good. I don't have any complaints.  

We are implementing a solution in AWS for one of our customers. It is more of a data analytics solution. We wanted to process data from different sources and put it into a central repository that can be used for any analysis or predictive modeling.

The most valuable feature of AWS Glue is scalability.

Since AWS Glue is not like an enterprise ETL tool, we need to put quite a lot of effort into customization. The solution has a visual editor, but most ETL transformations cannot be implemented or constructed using that. We always have to do a script. The solution's visual ETL tool is of no use for actual implementation.

I have been using AWS Glue for two years.

I rate AWS Glue an eight out of ten for stability.

Most of our clients for AWS Glue are enterprise businesses.

I rate AWS Glue ten out of ten for scalability.

Nobody from AWS technical support has implementation experience.

Neutral

On a scale from one to ten, where one is difficult and ten is easy, I rate the solution's configuration a five and its implementation a two or three out of ten.

The solution's pricing is pay-as-you-go. If you are using the solution for an enterprise business, it will be expensive.

AWS Glue is a cloud-based solution.

Overall, I rate AWS Glue a six out of ten.

Currently, we are utilizing AWS Glue for various ETL workloads, specifically in the life sciences domain. Our primary objective is to acquire data from various sources. Then, we store it in Redshift. This is where the complete use case of AWS Glue comes into the picture.

The solution is highly user-friendly, and its features are easy to use. The new addition of AWS Glue Data Catalog is also very beneficial, making the tool even more helpful for its users.

The solution could be cheaper. The price of the solution is an area that needs improvement.

I have been using AWS Glue in my organization for a year. I am an end-user and a customer of the solution.

It is a stable solution. We have not faced any issues in the past year, so it's pretty stable. Stability-wise, I rate it a ten out of ten.

The solution has proven to be scalable, and from my experience in the data engineering domain, I rate it an eight out of ten. It is worth noting that I may not be the most qualified person to provide a rating since I mostly manage and work on data-related tasks. Currently, approximately 20-25 people in our company use the solution.

I had no experience with the technical support team of AWS Glue.

Previously, I used Azure Data Factory. But I did not find it really helpful. And it was a bit complex. It was not that user-friendly. And I am much more comfortable with the AWS services as compared to Azure services.

The initial setup of the solution is straightforward, and I find it easy to implement. I rate the setup process a nine on a scale of one to ten, where ten is the easiest. As for the deployment process, we usually request our platform team to handle it, and they are quite efficient in deploying and managing the infrastructure. Although I am not directly involved in the deployment process, my understanding is that it can be completed in just a few hours with the help of two to three team members. Our platform team consists of data engineers, architects, and platform engineers who cater to the needs of various projects and products within the AWS ecosystem. Fortunately, the solution does not require any maintenance.

Price-wise, the solution is adequate, and we have no issues with it. We believe that the cost is justified given the number of users and the features it provides. Overall, it can be considered an average-priced tool. I would rate the solution a six or seven on a scale of one to ten, with ten being very expensive. Specifically, I rate its pricing a six out of ten.

Before choosing AWS Glue, I evaluated Azure Data Factory.

I would tell those planning to use AWS Glue to try it. I rate the overall solution a ten out of ten.

I primarily use AWS Glue as a lightweight ETL to migrate our existing on-prem workloads to a cloud environment without looking at a lot of migration paths. 

AWS Glue served the purpose of migrating our on-prem workloads to a cloud environment without involving a heavy load. It ensured that we were able to test every migrated component independently.

AWS Glue's best features are scalability and cloud-based features.

AWS Glue would be improved by making it easier to switch from single to multi-cloud.

I've been using AWS Glue for eighteen months.

I would rate AWS Glue's scalability eight out of ten, as it still has some room to improve.

AWS Glue is straightforward to implement, and you won't see any technical complexity if you're from a development background.

We also considered Airflow, but Glue was a better fit for our engineering-heavy workloads because we wanted a serverless option.

I would rate AWS Glue eight out of ten.

Once you get the data and you don't know about the structure of the data, then Glue is very helpful to estimate the structure, including where is the structure, and it'll identify everything for you. It has one component that is called Glue Crawler that is quite useful for this task. It will go through segments of your data and try to guess their structure. It pops out the structure, and you can modify it according to your convenience.

It is good to basically perform the ETL when your files are stored in the S3 bucket. Glue supports other external sources also. That said, most of the time, we have basically given our proposal to clients if the data is available in S3.

The solution helps organizations gain flexibility in defining the structure of the data.

You can define and then include the original data structure and decide what the required fills are or what other ones you can omit. You can perform certain processing tasks also, and you can basically apply the multiplying factor; you can do the cleanup, et cetera, on the fly with the Glue.

The Glue Crawler can have a set of connectors, so you can utilize those connectors to connect with the external databases, which may be on-premise in different networks or maybe locally on AWS. Basically, you can use the connector to fetch the data. 

Once you have a data schema, you can start streaming or fetching the data in the particular format conversion. For example, suppose you have the text file, and you have Word in place or maybe in SQL, and you can use the connector on the fly to convert the database.

For batch processing, batch genetics, it is helpful for the ETL process.

The setup is easy. 

The solution offers a free trial. 

The solution can scale. 

It's stable.

Users only pay for what they use once they have a license. 

I haven't looked into Glue in terms of seeking out flaws. I've not come across missing features. 

I've been dealing with the solution for two or three years. I have given a lot of proposals based on customer demand.

The solution is quite stable and reliable. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It is reliable. 

Typically, data analytics individuals use the solution. It's not for an entire organization.

It's a scalable solution. I'd rate it ten out of ten. 

We do have plans to increase usage. We are in the process of moving many things to the cloud, and if they move onto AWS, they'll need Glue.

I've never been in touch with technical support. I can't speak to how helpful or responsive they are. 

The solution is very straightforward to set up and implement. 

I'd rate the ease of deployment at an eight or nine out of ten. However, it all depends on the circumstances. 

The deployment only takes two to three minutes. It's very fast.

Using the console, you have different sections of AWS Glue You can go and specify the input data source and output target data place. Then you need to specify the transformation. If you want to do the filtering, et cetera, you have to specify. You have the blueprint of transformation functions available also, and you can select from there and then just run it. 

I've only just explored the solution. It has not been deployed yet. 

When you are just learning and testing the solution, it is free. I cannot speak to the full cost beyond that, as I am just experimenting with the product. They do offer it to users for a limited time to try for free, however.

My understanding is you only pay for what you use, so pricing would vary based on that. You don't need to maintain a cluster and it is serverless. 

There are no extra costs beyond a standard license fee.

We are using the latest version of the solution. The solution runs on the cloud and is serverless. 

It's a good solution to use when people are not exporting analytics. If you want to perform some ETL on your data and the data is complex, then you should go for Glue. It is easy to set up.

I'd rate the solution ten out of ten. 

We are primarily using it for batch crossing and transformations.

We have a large set of data and we are doing some transformations and identification. We are cleaning the data and transformations. Then we are putting the data into the destination table. So it is very comfortable.

The most valuable features currently are glue studio, jobs, and triggers.

I would like to see stable libraries at the moment they are not there.

I have been using AWS Glue for the past five years.

The stability I would consider to be an extensible Apache Spark.

The scalability is good and we have three hundred projects we are working with.

Previously, we used EMR, Informatica, Data Pipeline, and Azure Data Factory.

The initial setup is straightforward.

We did our deployment in-house with the CI/CD integrations like GitHub and deployed the code on Glue. 

We are seeing a very good return on our investment.

The current cost is around forty to fifty thousand a month.

I would definitely recommend using AWS Glue for batching procedures. I would rate AWS Glue an eight out of ten.

I use AWS Glue for data processing. Some of my colleagues have data for software, and I use AWS Glue to transform and inspect this data.

It's very good to manage. It is easy to integrate other products with AWS. 

Glue integrates with other AWS processes and networks. So, it's quite easy to integrate.

I've worked with AI integration but I haven't gone into much depth on that topic.

AWS Glue's error handling is difficult. 

The errors in AWS are very hard to handle. The screen is very hard to understand. 

I have to use CloudWatch, but whatever our error was, the new ones, and so on. I would test this with someone. It's not so easy for me, and there are more things related to this.

I have been using it for a year and a half. 

I would rate the stability a nine out of ten. 

I would rate the scalability a seven out of ten. 

My data is small, so we need to consider more days. We need to deal with what we have, but I understand the documentation. 

Some people find it hard, but I rated it a seven. In my company, TechOps uses AWS with about 1,200 users.

I worked with Databricks. In my opinion, Databricks is improving and is easier to use. It's more user-friendly, and I think it's better overall.

I work with a big company, and most of it is already quickly done, like using something that is a blueprint. This configuration stuff is already working in another place. The only thing I have to do with the cloud is the remote configuration.

AWS can be expensive.

Overall, I would rate it a seven out of ten. I would recommend it.