No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Apache Flink vs Google Cloud Dataflow comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 17, 2024

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

Apache Flink
Ranking in Streaming Analytics
3rd
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
19
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Google Cloud Dataflow
Ranking in Streaming Analytics
9th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
15
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2026, in the Streaming Analytics category, the mindshare of Apache Flink is 9.8%, down from 13.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Google Cloud Dataflow is 3.9%, down from 7.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Streaming Analytics Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Apache Flink9.8%
Google Cloud Dataflow3.9%
Other86.3%
Streaming Analytics
 

Featured Reviews

Aswini Atibudhi - PeerSpot reviewer
Distinguished AI Leader at Walmart Global Tech at Walmart
Enables robust real-time data processing but documentation needs refinement
Apache Flink is very powerful, but it can be challenging for beginners because it requires prior experience with similar tools and technologies, such as Kafka and batch processing. It's essential to have a clear foundation; hence, it can be tough for beginners. However, once they grasp the concepts and have examples or references, it becomes easier. Intermediate users who are integrating with Kafka or other sources may find it smoother. After setting up and understanding the concepts, it becomes quite stable and scalable, allowing for customization of jobs. Every software, including Apache Flink, has room for improvement as it evolves. One key area for enhancement is user-friendliness and the developer experience; improving documentation and API specifications is essential, as they can currently be verbose and complex. Debugging and local testing pose challenges for newcomers, particularly when learning about concepts such as time semantics and state handling. Although the APIs exist, they aren't intuitive enough. We also need to simplify operational procedures, such as developing tools and tuning Flink clusters, as these processes can be quite complex. Additionally, implementing one-click rollback for failures and improving state management during dynamic scaling while retaining the last states is vital, as the current large states pose scaling challenges.
reviewer2812851 - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Customer Data Platform Specialist at a marketing services firm with 1,001-5,000 employees
Unified user personas have improved data workflows and support detailed monitoring and logging
Google Cloud has many streams and products. In Google Cloud, everything is translated in the backend, so we do not have to use services such as Apache Beam. When you want to use Google Cloud Functions, you write the code, and the backend talks to all the libraries or Apache, so we do not need to be concerned about those. We just need to use our functions that translate and have many tools and services readily available. Google Cloud Dataflow has made it very easy for detailed monitoring and logging features for pipeline performance assessment. For example, if I am using Google Cloud Functions, I can easily see what changes I have done and trace it properly. I can see what is happening with this script, how many users are affected, whether the script is working, what is failing, and how we can rectify issues with proper monitoring.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"Among all of this, if I would talk about streaming, Apache Flink wins hands down, but there are other products like Apache Pulsar which I have no idea."
"The setup was not too difficult."
"The ease of usage, even for complex tasks, stands out."
"We are very happy with the product, and we have been able to achieve all of the use cases that we are expected to deliver for our customers."
"The setup was not too difficult."
"The product helps us to create both simple and complex data processing tasks. Over time, it has facilitated integration and navigation across multiple data sources tailored to each client's needs. We use Apache Flink to control our clients' installations."
"Apache Flink offers a range of powerful configurations and experiences for development teams. Its strength lies in its development experience and capabilities."
"The main advantage is the turnaround time, which has been reduced drastically because of Apache Flink, and now everything is in almost real time with no waiting or lag of data in the application while machine resources are utilized much more efficiently."
"I don't need a server running all the time while using the tool. It is also easy to setup. The product offers a pay-as-you-go service."
"The support team is good and it's easy to use."
"The integration within Google Cloud Platform is very good."
"Migrating our batch processing jobs to Google Cloud Dataflow led to a reduction in cost by 70%."
"Google's support team is good at resolving issues, especially with large data."
"It allows me to test solutions locally using runners like Direct Runner without having to start a Dataflow job, which can be costly."
"The most valuable features of Google Cloud Dataflow are the integration, it's very simple if you have the complete stack, which we are using, it is overall very easy to use, user-friendly, and cost-effective if you know how to use it, and the solution is very flexible for programmers, if you know how to do scripts or program in Python or any other language, it's extremely easy to use."
"The most valuable features of Google Cloud Dataflow are the integration, it's very simple if you have the complete stack, which we are using. It is overall very easy to use, user-friendly friendly, and cost-effective if you know how to use it. The solution is very flexible for programmers, if you know how to do scripts or program in Python or any other language, it's extremely easy to use."
 

Cons

"We have a machine learning team that works with Python, but Apache Flink does not have full support for the language."
"The TimeWindow feature is a bit tricky. The timing of the content and the windowing is a bit changed in 1.11. They have introduced watermarks. A watermark is basically associating every data with a timestamp. The timestamp could be anything, and we can provide the timestamp. So, whenever I receive a tweet, I can actually assign a timestamp, like what time did I get that tweet. The watermark helps us to uniquely identify the data. Watermarks are tricky if you use multiple events in the pipeline. For example, you have three resources from different locations, and you want to combine all those inputs and also perform some kind of logic. When you have more than one input screen and you want to collect all the information together, you have to apply TimeWindow all. That means that all the events from the upstream or from the up sources should be in that TimeWindow, and they were coming back. Internally, it is a batch of events that may be getting collected every five minutes or whatever timing is given. Sometimes, the use case for TimeWindow is a bit tricky. It depends on the application as well as on how people have given this TimeWindow. This kind of documentation is not updated. Even the test case documentation is a bit wrong. It doesn't work. Flink has updated the version of Apache Flink, but they have not updated the testing documentation. Therefore, I have to manually understand it. We have also been exploring failure handling. I was looking into changelogs for which they have posted the future plans and what are they going to deliver. We have two concerns regarding this, which have been noted down. I hope in the future that they will provide this functionality. Integration of Apache Flink with other metric services or failure handling data tools needs some kind of update or its in-depth knowledge is required in the documentation. We have a use case where we want to actually analyze or get analytics about how much data we process and how many failures we have. For that, we need to use Tomcat, which is an analytics tool for implementing counters. We can manage reports in the analyzer. This kind of integration is pretty much straightforward. They say that people must be well familiar with all the things before using this type of integration. They have given this complete file, which you can update, but it took some time. There is a learning curve with it, which consumed a lot of time. It is evolving to a newer version, but the documentation is not demonstrating that update. The documentation is not well incorporated. Hopefully, these things will get resolved now that they are implementing it. Failure is another area where it is a bit rigid or not that flexible. We never use this for scaling because complexity is very high in case of a failure. Processing and providing the scaled data back to Apache Flink is a bit challenging. They have this concept of offsetting, which could be simplified."
"In terms of stability with Flink, it is something that you have to deal with every time. Stability is the number one problem that we have seen with Flink, and it really depends on the kind of problem that you're trying to solve."
"We have a machine learning team that works with Python, but Apache Flink does not have full support for the language."
"I am using the Python API and I have found the solution to be underdeveloped compared to others. There needs to be better integration with notebooks to allow for more practical development."
"The machine learning library is not very flexible."
"PyFlink is not as fully featured as Python itself, so there are some limitations to what you can do with it."
"Apache Flink's documentation should be available in more languages."
"There are certain challenges regarding the Google Cloud Composer which can be improved."
"The deployment time could also be reduced."
"The authentication part of the product is an area of concern where improvements are required."
"The system could function in an automated fashion and provide suggestions based on past transactions to achieve better scalability."
"I would like Google Cloud Dataflow to be integrated with IT data flow and other related services to make it easier to use as it is a complex tool."
"Occasionally, dealing with a huge volume of data causes failure due to array size."
"The technical support is very hard to reach."
"Currently, not all error logs are available to users and this could make debugging failed jobs very difficult."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"This is an open-source platform that can be used free of charge."
"It's an open-source solution."
"The solution is open-source, which is free."
"It's an open source."
"Apache Flink is open source so we pay no licensing for the use of the software."
"The price of the solution depends on many factors, such as how they pay for tools in the company and its size."
"The tool is cheap."
"The solution is not very expensive."
"Google Cloud Dataflow is a cheap solution."
"On a scale from one to ten, where one is cheap, and ten is expensive, I rate Google Cloud Dataflow's pricing a four out of ten."
"The solution is cost-effective."
"On a scale from one to ten, where one is cheap, and ten is expensive, I rate the solution's pricing a seven to eight out of ten."
"Google Cloud is slightly cheaper than AWS."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Streaming Analytics solutions are best for your needs.
890,124 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
19%
Retailer
12%
Computer Software Company
9%
Manufacturing Company
6%
Financial Services Firm
20%
Manufacturing Company
13%
Retailer
10%
Insurance Company
5%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business5
Midsize Enterprise3
Large Enterprise12
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business3
Midsize Enterprise2
Large Enterprise11
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Apache Flink?
The solution is expensive. I rate the product’s pricing a nine out of ten, where one is cheap and ten is expensive.
What needs improvement with Apache Flink?
Apache could improve Apache Flink by providing more functionality, as they need to fully support data integration. The connectors are still very few for Apache Flink. There is a lack of functionali...
What is your primary use case for Apache Flink?
I am working with Apache Flink, which is the tool we use for data integration. Apache Flink is for data, and we are working on the data integration project, not big data, using Apache Flink and Apa...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Google Cloud Dataflow?
Pricing is normal. It is part of a package received from Google, and they are not charging us too high.
What needs improvement with Google Cloud Dataflow?
I feel there could be something that they can introduce, such as when we have data in the tables, a feature that creates a unique persona of the user automatically, so we do not have to do that man...
What is your primary use case for Google Cloud Dataflow?
The primary use case for Google Cloud Dataflow is when a brand has a lot of data and wants to store it in their warehouse. They can use BigQuery to store their data or use big data solutions to sto...
 

Also Known As

Flink
Google Dataflow
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

LogRhythm, Inc., Inter-American Development Bank, Scientific Technologies Corporation, LotLinx, Inc., Benevity, Inc.
Absolutdata, Backflip Studios, Bluecore, Claritics, Crystalloids, Energyworx, GenieConnect, Leanplum, Nomanini, Redbus, Streak, TabTale
Find out what your peers are saying about Apache Flink vs. Google Cloud Dataflow and other solutions. Updated: April 2026.
890,124 professionals have used our research since 2012.