Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Skyvia vs WhereScape RED comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on May 11, 2025

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

Skyvia
Ranking in Data Integration
54th
Average Rating
9.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.8
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
Cloud Data Integration (33rd)
WhereScape RED
Ranking in Data Integration
48th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
15
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2025, in the Data Integration category, the mindshare of Skyvia is 0.3%, up from 0.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of WhereScape RED is 1.1%, up from 0.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Data Integration
 

Featured Reviews

RH
The product works, is simple to use, and is reliable.
Error handling. This has caused me many problems in the past. When an error occurs, the event on the connection that is called does not seem to behave as documented. If I attempt a retry or opt not to display an error dialog, it does it anyway. In all fairness, I have never reported this. I think it is more important that a unique error code is passed to the error event that identifies a uniform type of error that occurred, such as ecDisconnect, eoInvalidField. It is very hard to find what any of the error codes currently passed actually mean. A list would be great for each database engine. Trying to catch an exception without displaying the UniDAC error message is impossible, no matter how you modify the parameters in the OnError of the TUniConnection object. I have already implemented the following things myself. They are suggestions rather than specific requests. Copy Datasets: This contains an abundance of redundant options. I think that a facility to copy one dataset to another in a single call would be handy. Redundancy: I am currently working on this. I have extended the TUniConnection to have an additional property called FallbackConnection. If the TUniConnection goes offline, the connection attempts to connect the FallbackConnection. If successful, it then sets the Connection properties of all live UniDatasets in the app to the FallbackConnection and re-opens them if necessary. The extended TUniConnection holds a list of datasets that were created. Each dataset is responsible for registering itself with the connection. This is a highly specific feature. It supports an offline mode that is found in mission critical/point of sale solutions. I have never seen it implement before in any DACs, but I think it is a really unique feature with a big impact. Dataset to JSON/XML: A ToSql function on a dataset that creates a full SQL Text statement with all parameters converted to text (excluding blobs) and included in the returned string. Extended TUniScript:- TMyUniScript allows me to add lines of text to a script using the normal dataset functions, Script.Append, Script.FieldByName(‘xxx’).AsString := ‘yyy’, Script.AddToScript and finally Script.Post, then Script.Commit. The AddToScript builds the SQL text statement and appends it to the script using #e above. Record Size Calculation. It would be great if UniDac could estimate the size of a particular record from a query or table. This could be used to automatically set the packet fetch/request count based on the size of the Ethernet packets on the local area network. This I believe would increase performance and reduce network traffic for returning larger datasets. I am aware that this would also be a unique feature to UniDac but would gain a massive performance enhancement. I would suggest setting the packet size on the TUniConnection which would effect all linked datasets.
it_user584544 - PeerSpot reviewer
The ​architecture is based on metadata and documentation is automated.
I would love to see a GUI interface for defining dependencies between build processes. RED provides a spreadsheet like interface for defining the dependencies between builds. Once the dependencies are defined, RED can produce a nice dependency diagram to give a visualization of the dependency tree. It would be easier to define complex dependency relationships if the dependency diagram were interactive. Our legacy ETL tool provided this GUI dependency definition via a drag and drop diagram which was very useful. The solution provided by WhereScape does work, and the dependency diagrams generated are helpful. It would just be nice to have the ability to define dependencies via a diagram, since dependencies relationships are much easier to understand via a diagram.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Data Integration solutions are best for your needs.
853,118 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
Financial Services Firm
17%
Computer Software Company
10%
Insurance Company
8%
Manufacturing Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

Skyvia, Skyvia Data Integration
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Boeing, Sony, Honda, Oracle, BMW, Samsung
British American Tobacco, Cornell University, Allianz Benelux, Finnair, Solarwinds and many more.
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, Informatica, Talend and others in Data Integration. Updated: May 2025.
853,118 professionals have used our research since 2012.