AWS Glue Reviews

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.

We used AWS Glue to build our data warehouse. We built prototypes to go all the way all across their warehouse platforms. From AWS Glue to Spreadsheets and then QuickSight, that's how we're building their warehouse.

I like that it's flexible, powerful, and allows you to write your own queries and scripts to get the needed transformations.

It would be better if it were more user-friendly. The interesting thing we found is that it was a little strange at the beginning. The way Glue works is not very straightforward. After trying different things, for example, we used just the console to create jobs. Then we realized that things were not working as expected. After researching and learning more, we realized that even though the console creates the script for the ETL processes, you need to modify or write your own script in Spark to do everything you want it to do.

For example, we are pulling data from our source database and our application database, which is in Aurora. From there, we are doing the ETL to transform the data and write the results into Redshift. But what was surprising is that it's almost like whatever you want to do, you can do it with Glue because you have the option to put together your own script. Even though there are many functionalities and many connections, you have the opportunity to write your own queries to do whatever transformations you need to do.

It's a little deceiving that some options are supposed to work in a certain way when you set them up in the console, but then they are not exactly working the right way or not as expected. It would be better if they provided more examples and more documentation on options.

I have been using AWS Glue since last year.

On a scale from one to ten, I would give AWS Glue a nine.

I constructed a straightforward ETL job using AWS Glue, wherein I had to load a couple of files in the Teradata database.

AWS Glue is quite better than other tools, but you have to learn it properly before you start using it.

While working on AWS Glue, I could not find any training material for it. Although it's not a problem with the product, the solution could include better documentation.

I have been using AWS Glue for about two months.

AWS Glue is a stable solution.

AWS Glue's initial setup is quite straightforward.

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

We are using AWS Glue for transforming firewalls synced to the Data Lake in the bronze zone. The ATL uses the solution to transform fields in the silver layer and later we will produce the gold zone. We are using the Delta Lake Architecture.

The most valuable feature of AWS Glue is its ease of use and good documentation. Additionally, we can do all the transformations that we need.

The price of the solution could improve.

I have been using AWS Glue for approximately one month.

The stability of AWS Glue is good.

AWS Glue is highly scalable.

There are dozens of customers using this solution.

I have not used the support from AWS Glue but I know their support is good.

I have previously used Azure and Spark for testing.

The initial setup of AWS Glue is simple. In other solutions, such as Spark, the configuration would take a lot longer.

I did the deployment of AWS Glue myself with the AMS console. I am a data engineer.

The overall cost of AWS Glue could be better. It cost approximately $1,000 a month. There is paid support available from AWS Glue.

If the cost of AWS Glue was 50 percent less then we would not move to another solution.

I am moving to the EMR serverless or GCP solution.

I rate AWS Glue a nine out of ten.

Glue is a NoSQL-based data ETL tool that has some advantages over IIS and ISAs. It is tailored and customized to use with SQL Server, which works very well in that platform.

If you want to use other data sources, the NoSQL concept makes it very easy, because missing data can be inserted as a new column or with null values.

That is not the case with many other tools. If you have on-premises tools, such as IIS, they don't manage missing data well.

If you want extremely high-performance functionality, you have to use both AWS Glue or Data Lake to store it in some temporary table. First, you will have to do some cleaning of the data, then if you need performance and speed, you have to use IIS with an IBM tool. 

You have to use the right tool in the right places. For example, if you're using Oracle, you have got to use the Oracle tools. If you are using SQL, you have to use the SQL tools. There is no other tool that provides the performance.

It's context-based and project-based. In the projects that I have used, it has worked well.

There is a learning curve to this tool.

I have been working with AWS Glue for four years.

Everything runs on AWS, even if it belongs to a third party. For example, if you have a Netflix subscription, it runs on AWS. We have other products or vendor subscriptions that run on AWS.

Undoubtedly, the cloud is built to handle failure. If you have your devices, and your resources configured correctly, you won't have any issues. I haven't seen a problem.

You have to pay for their technical support, and depending on which level of subscription, you will receive a call within an hour; otherwise, you will have to wait for days.

We also use Azure's Data Lake, and I worked with Tipco in the past, though it's been a few years since we used it.

You should select the best tool for the job or the projects that are currently being worked on. Tipco was heavily used in the previous project we worked on.

It takes some time to learn, but once you get the hang of it, you'll be fine. It's like any other IT tool, where nobody is an expert or isn't an expert, it is just the way you are exposed to a tool. 

You've chosen the right tool if you understand how the data works and what it needs to do. It's like going to Home Depot to get the right tool. You can purchase a set of tools, and it will work for you, but you will still need to purchase something else.

It's one of those tools in which someone must be an expert. After that, all tools and platforms become secondary.

With AWS Glue, you pay more, but if you want to process the data, with speed and performance, you need the correct EC2 instances.

There is a price to pay. It doesn't come free.

Technical support is a paid service, and which subscription you have is dependent on that. You must pay one of them, and it ranges from $15,000 to $25,000 per year. 

You sign up for a level of service, and it does not come for free. As previously stated, everything is based on performance, ELAs.

It was very expensive, at that time. If a company wants to pay the money, it makes my job easier. However, if the company or enterprise does not have the funds to pay for it, then it is a hassle.

In that environment, there is a lot going on. There are some things that you can get for free, and there are some add-ons that you can develop or use that have been tested. It's all about convenience and service. You will get what you pay for if you pay for what you want.

I'm not a fan of any tools; it all depends on the organization I work for, where their data is, what they want to do with it, how quickly they want to get there, and what their budget is, and you work around that. For me, I would not choose one over the other, unless I know the details of the project.

I would rate AWS Glue a nine out of ten.

We use the solution to collect customers' data containing multiple files and convert it into a common database. Later, we send the database for SQL injection.

The solution's most valuable feature is its ability to efficiently collect and catalog the data in the warehouse.

They should improve the solution's performance in case of large amounts of data. Currently, AWS fails to handle massive databases acquired from various sources. Also, it is challenging to queue the data or use a standard code in AWS environment. We need to install a third-party tool to tackle the issue. We need to use another tool to convert the data as well. Thus, we are using multiple tools to handle the database. They should work on this particular area.

We have been using the solution for one year.

It is a stable solution. I rate its stability as an eight.

I rate the solution's scalability as a six.

The initial setup is a bit complex, and I rate the process as a six. We have to install multiple third-party tools whenever we update the security patches or renew the solution. Thus, the deployment process is complicated.

If you already have AWS environment, you can opt for AWS Glue for its ETL operations feature; if you want to process multiple operations, such as creating a table or catalog, or for machine learning purposes better to go for other database tools.

I rate the solution as a seven.

AWS Glue is essentially used for data engineering ETL jobs to extract, transform, and load data. We use it to clean data. You have multiple data sources from your application that are not so clean. You have this data and may want to delete certain columns or fill in certain data in an Excel sheet. That's where the extract part comes in. Then, you transform, drop, or make the data uniform and load it to your destination like a data warehouse.

The solution’s most valuable feature is the ETL job. AWS Glue is an easy-to-use solution. AWS Glue integrates seamlessly with other AWS services like Athena, Redshift, and S3.

The solution’s technical support could be improved.

I have been using AWS Glue for a few months.

AWS Glue is a stable solution.

I rate the solution’s stability eight and a half out of ten.

In the future, our data sets are going to increase. For now, the solution's scalability is fine.

I previously used Data Pipeline, and I tried using Lambda.

The solution’s initial setup is easy.

AWS Glue is built for large datasets, and it does the job perfectly. I would recommend the solution to other users.

Overall, I rate the solution eight and a half out of ten.

Our company uses the solution for ETL data movement for our customers such as on-premises to cloud, cloud to cloud, and cloud to Snowflake. We also data catalog and schedule ETL jobs. We are able to monitor all jobs through AWS services. 

Transformations are valuable because you can modify or override complex data logic from an open source or Spark to solve issues. 

For example, it is easy to solve issues where volume is good but performance is degrading because you can split jobs into small chunks to more quickly handle data loads. 

The setup and installation is a bit complex without advanced knowledge or training. It would be easier for an AWS expert or someone in DevOps.

Transformations need improvements to be more user friendly and rely less on coding like Matillion. 

I have been using the solution for three years. 

The solution's stability is decent and rates higher than other products. It works well with Snowflake, Azure, GCP, and AWS-supported products. 

A hybrid situation may cause delays in performance. 

The solution is scalable. 

One of our customers used technical support and found them to be helpful. 

The setup and installation is a bit complex. Training or advance knowledge is required. Someone with AWS experience or a DevOps perspective would have fewer issues. 

We install the solution for customers and the timeline depends on the job. 

A complete project will take a few days to a week for deployment. The number of jobs and components determines how many technicians are required for setup, installation, and deployment. Technician requirements can range from two to fifteen. 

Deployment will take a couple of hours for a few announcement jobs that deploy from the CI/CD pipeline.

The solution is my second choice because I prefer Snowflake's capabilities.