We performed a comparison between Informatica PowerCenter, Oracle Data Integrator (ODI), and Quest SharePlex based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, Informatica, Oracle and others in Data Integration."We have found the PowerCenter and B2B data transformation most valuable."
"The most valuable features of Informatica PowerCenter are the ease of use, and development, and is simple to find resources."
"It works with any multi-databases, so it works with Sybase, SQL Server. Also, the performance is really good and it is easy to use."
"It reduces a lot of legacy coding."
"Enterprise-scale ETL solution that's very stable and is easy to scale. It integrates and connects with multiple new systems, both structured and semi-structured."
"The ability to scale through partitions helped us to improve the performance."
"Technical support is great. It's one of the reasons we really like them. When you compare support from IBM and support from Informatica, Informatica is much better."
"The technical support is excellent."
"It is an ETL tool, which does the extract, transform, and load."
"ODI's best features are customization, integration with other versioning tools, and the ability to define new knowledge modules."
"The scalability is great. It's one of the reasons we chose the solution."
"ODI is a very accessible tool, especially since the mapping functionality has been added."
"The most valuable features of ODI are the knowledge modules, such as the Loading Knowledge module and the Check Knowledge module, they are helpful. We can check for the constraints in ODI. That helps in figuring out what are the constraints that are the primary keys created in the tables. We can check them with the Check Knowledge module."
"Easy to understand, very developer-friendly, and has a big forum community and lots of documentation for support."
"The most valuable feature of ODI is the to use of the whole ETL to create a data lake."
"I like that Oracle Data Integrator (ODI) has a straightforward setup and offers good technical support."
"I like SharePlex's Compare and Repair tool."
"The core replication and its performance. Performance is crucial, and SharePlex is by far the fastest. The way it handles replication to multiple targets along with basic filtering, as well as from multiple sources to a single target, is very efficient."
"There are some capabilities within SharePlex where you can see how the data is migrating and if it still maintains good data integrity. For example, if there are some tables that get out of sync, there are ways to find them and fix the problem on the spot. Since these are very common issues, we can easily fix these types of problems using utilities, like compare and repair. So, if you find something is out of sync, then you can just repair that table. It basically syncs that table from source to target to see if there are any differences. It will then replicate those differences to the target."
"Because of the volume of the transactions, we heavily use a feature that allows SharePlex to replicate thousands of transactions. It's called PEP, Post Enhancement Performance, and that has helped us scale tremendously."
"The core features of the solution we like are the reliability of the data transfer and the accuracy of data read and write. The stability of the solution is also excellent."
"While Informatica is great for data-integration, it does not have any analytics features. Thus, organizations have to always look for another product for their BI needs."
"As a connector to big data, it is not well developed. We've had problems connecting Informatica with Hadoop. The functionality to connect Informatica with Hadoop, for me it's not good."
"Compared to solutions offering similar functionalities, Informatica PowerCenter is not very flexible regarding customized integrations."
"There is a need to buy a separate license if one wishes to connect with some kind of SAP system, such as SalesForce."
"What I didn't like about it is that the platform itself is not great at distributed processing. When you need high parallel processing, it has some inherent issues. We had to use Java transformation, and it did not go very well. I have heard that it is going to the cloud, but we haven't tried that."
"There is some room for improvement in terms of pricing."
"The pricing could be improved."
"An issue which should be addressed is that the solution only allows us to do structured, as opposed to unstructured, data processing."
"If there was an add-on tool to hide the performance issues and solve them for me, then I might be interested in that as it would provide me value."
"ODI could improve the ease of use. There is a steep learning curve to use the solution."
"I rate it a seven out of 10 because there is room for growth because ODI is still new, in comparison to Informatica, which is a mature product."
"Reverse engineering is complicated and challenging to manage."
"We used a third party to do the implementation of ODI."
"An area for improvement would be the lack of SQL compatibility - ODI has no ability to interact with SQL unstructured types and data types."
"It lacks a suite of tools suitable for fully processing data and moving it into decision support warehouses."
"The price needs to be lowered. It's too expensive."
"I would like more ability to automate installation and configuration in line with some of the DevOps processes that are more mature in the market. That would be a considerable improvement."
"I would like the solution to have some kind of machine learning and AI capabilities. Often, if we want to improve the performance of posting, we have to bump up a parameter. That means we need to stop the process, come up with a figure that we want to bump the parameter up to, and then start SharePlex. Machine learning and AI capabilities for these kinds of improvement would tremendously help boost productivity for us."
"For its function in relation to replication (i.e. filtering), I'd give it a six or seven out of 10. GoldenGate has much more functionality by comparison."
"I don't know how easy it would be to change the architecture in an already implemented replication. For example, if we have a certain way of architecting for a particular database migration and want to change that during a period of time, is that an easy or difficult change? There was a need for us to change the architecture in-between the migration, but we didn't do it. We thought, "This is possibly complicated. Let's not change it in the middle because we were approaching our cutover date." That was one thing that we should have checked with support about for training."
"The reporting features need improvement. It would be very good for users to have a clear understanding of the status of replication."