We performed a comparison between AWS Glue and Confluent based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: Of the two solutions, users like the integration capabilities of Confluent. In addition, users appreciate that there is an open source version of Confluent and also mention an ROI. For these reasons, Confluent wins out in this comparison.
"The most valuable feature of AWS Glue is that it provides a GUI format with a drag-and-drop feature."
"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 most valuable feature for me is the visual interface of AWS Glue."
"The facility to integrate with S3 and the possibility to use Jupyter Notebook inside the pipeline are the most valuable features."
"We no longer had to worry much about infrastructure management because AWS Glue is serverless, and Amazon takes care of the underlying infrastructure."
"Its user interface is quite good. You just need to choose some options to create a job in AWS Glue. The code-generation feature is also useful. If you don't want to customize it and simply want to read a file and store the data in the database, it can generate the code for you."
"AWS Glue's most valuable features are the data catalog, including crawlers and tables, and Glue Studio, which means you don't have to use custom code."
"One of the best features of the solution is its ability to easily integrate with other AWS services."
"The design of the product is extremely well built and it is highly configurable."
"The most valuable feature that we are using is the data replication between the data centers allowing us to configure a disaster recovery or software. However, is it's not mandatory to use and because most of the features that we use are from Apache Kafka, such as end-to-end encryption. Internally, we can develop our own kind of product or service from Apache Kafka."
"The most valuable feature of Confluent is the wide range of features provided. They're leading the market in this category."
"Kafka Connect framework is valuable for connecting to the various source systems where code doesn't need to be written."
"Confluence's greatest asset is its user-friendly interface, coupled with its remarkable ability to seamlessly integrate with a vast range of other solutions."
"The documentation process is fast with the tool."
"We mostly use the solution's message queues and event-driven architecture."
"I find Confluent's Kafka Connectors and Kafka Streams invaluable for my use cases because they simplify real-time data processing and ETL tasks by providing reliable, pre-packaged connectors and tools."
"The start-up time is really high right now. For instance, when you start up a new job, you have to wait for five or eight minutes before it starts. If the start-up time is reduced to one or two minutes, it will be great. It will be better to have a direct linkage to Redshift in AWS. If we can use data catalogs from Redshift, it will be so easy to create some data catalogs. Currently, we can only use data catalogs from S3."
"In terms of performance, if they can further optimize the execution time for serverless jobs, it would be a welcome improvement."
"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."
"I would like to see a more robust interface on the no-code side. This would be nice to be able to split cells."
"There should be more connectors for different databases."
"The mapping area and the use of the data catalog from Glue could be better."
"It is not clear how the partition discovery would have been affected by more data coming in."
"While working on AWS Glue, I could not find any training material for it."
"there is room for improvement in the visualization."
"It could have more integration with different platforms."
"The Schema Registry service could be improved. I would like a bigger knowledge base of other use cases and more technical forums. It would be good to have more flexible monitoring features added to the next release as well."
"It could have more themes. They should also have more reporting-oriented plugins as well. It would be great to have free custom reports that can be dispatched directly from Jira."
"Confluent's price needs improvement."
"They should remove Zookeeper because of security issues."
"Confluence could improve the server version of the solution. However, most companies are going to the cloud."
"The formatting aspect within the page can be improved and more powerful."
AWS Glue is ranked 1st in Cloud Data Integration with 37 reviews while Confluent is ranked 3rd in Streaming Analytics with 19 reviews. AWS Glue is rated 7.8, while Confluent is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of AWS Glue writes "Provides serverless mechanism, easy data transformation and automated infrastructure management". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Confluent writes "Has good technical support services and a valuable feature for real-time data streaming ". AWS Glue is most compared with AWS Database Migration Service, Informatica PowerCenter, SSIS, Informatica Cloud Data Integration and Oracle Integration Cloud Service, whereas Confluent is most compared with Amazon MSK, Amazon Kinesis, Databricks, Oracle GoldenGate and Aiven for Apache Kafka. See our AWS Glue vs. Confluent report.
See our list of best Cloud Data Integration vendors.
We monitor all Cloud Data Integration reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
