Microsoft Azure Synapse Analytics Reviews

We are developing our SQL Data Warehouse locally, using SQL Server 2016 on our private cloud, and we will be migrating it to Azure once it is ready.

The company for which I am working deals with products in the leisure industry, such as museums and swimming pools. They use the data warehouse solution for big data reporting. Currently, we are developing a multi-platform data warehouse that can support the reporting requirements for all of the customers. Whatever analytics they want to perform will be done with the data warehouse, and not the SQL database application.

My role is to design the data warehouse, and once that is complete, we need to build the data pipelines so that the data can be moved from the application databases into the warehouse. Then we will design the OLAP servers and OLAP cubes, vertically, to give us a presentation layer on top of the data warehouse. This layer is what the customers will be using.

The most valuable feature is the incremental load because we do not need to refresh the entire data on a daily basis. We have a nightly load where all of the data is updated, and it is a very good feature.

The transaction log shipping gives us the ability to replicate the database onto different servers for backup and synchronization.

The major concern is that I have a hard time with having to version control the data warehouse all the time. As it is now, I have to open all of the ports and push everything onto the server. I would like to see version control implemented into the data warehouse. This would make the tool perfect. 

I have been using this Microsoft Azure SQL Data Warehouse for about two and a half years.

The version that we have been using, 2016, is stable. We have not used the 2019 version in production yet, but there is a team that is evaluating that version right now. I'm not sure of the reason for it not being in production, whether it is related to stability or not.

The scalability is good. I think we are already using a high availability cluster for 2016, so I assume that it will be the same with the 2019 version. We are also using it with our data recovery system, so it is not an issue.

We have approximately twelve to fifteen developers and approx. 900+ customers who will be using the data warehouse. We are acquiring customers on a monthly or quarterly basis, so it is a pretty big user base and we expect that our usage will continue to increase.

We don't have too many technical issues, so overall, I think that it's good enough.

I began with Microsoft SQL Server and have been on the Microsoft platform ever since.

The initial setup is pretty straightforward. It has been a long time since we first implemented this solution, but since that point, we have created a custom handbook that we can follow in order to set it up.

There are certain design concepts that can be used to design a data warehouse. My advice to anybody who is implementing this solution is to first study the user's needs, and then go with that approach. The design will be specific to the needs.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

We are a software development company and this is one of the solutions that we recommend to our clients. The applications that we develop make use of this technology.

Using Azure SQL Data Warehouse means that you don't have to worry about big servers.

The best part is the easy and user-friendly administration and handling of the data.

The configuration for things like high-availability could be more user-friendly for non-technical users.

We have been using Azure SQL Data Warehouse for almost twelve years.

This is a stable solution with no issues.

Scalability is the best part of going with a cloud-based solution. I don't have to worry about server space. Azure elasticity allows us to scale as much as we want, and it is pay-as-you-go, so we can scale up as we need to. What we propose to the people who are implementing this solution is to start with the minimum requirements and then scale up based on demand.

We have not seen any problems with technical support. We have Microsoft certification, so we very rarely contact them for any help. Normally, we handle the support for our clients.

The initial setup is straightforward. The requirements are very clear, and there is not much of a problem when you're doing it.

One of the recent upgrades we have done that included high-availability, loading the data, and setting everything up, took about a month and a half.

The licensing fees for this solution are on a pay-per-use basis, and not very expensive.

The core strength of Microsoft technologies is ease of use and administration, regardless of the type of product.

This is a good solution to go with, the cost is reasonable, and I recommend it.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

We haven't really implemented any SSIS. I haven't been in a project where it was implemented as part of the data we have been building.

The features we've found most valuable for data warehouses is extracting data, SSIS packages, and the DBs.

So far, with the current SQL that I'm using compared to what we've previously used, I'm happy with it. I wouldn't necessarily point out anything that needs improvement.

From my point of view from what we have implemented recently, I'm happy with the solution, I'm happy with the performance. I'm not entirely happy with the billing model. I'm not entirely happy with how the enterprise services are pretty expensive, but that's about it.

I have been using this solution for around 18 months.

It is very stable.

I think the architectural design is very scalable.

I never contacted Microsoft customer support. 

We do have access to it, but we haven't needed to.

I've used Tableau, I've used SQL DB, I've used SAP DB.

The initial setup wasn't complex. It was okay. It wasn't complex at all.

To set it up within full compliance with our cloud infrastructure team, I'd say maybe two weeks after beginning our testing. I'd say the team wasn't a hundred percent devoted to setting it up as they had other things to do. So I'd say I'll give it two weeks to be realistic for a large organization.

It depends on whether you have those resources internally or not. If you have internal resources you wouldn't need to outsource, if you don't have, you would. So it's not a matter of how good that application is but a question of whether you have the capability in house.

The enterprise services are pretty expensive.

We are a solution provider and we provide different tools for our clients. Microsoft Azure SQL Data Warehouse is one of the solutions that we have implemented.

The use cases vary depending on the client. We have a couple of clients who are moving their data from on-premises to Azure databases, and they are using this solution primarily for reporting analytics. They also use visualization tools on top of the reporting.

The main advantage of using this solution is its ability to scale and handle very large amounts of data, in the petabyte range.

When we are not using this solution we can simply shut it down saving us costs, which is a nice advantage.

With respect to what needs to be improved, concurrent connectivity has some limitations. 

We have been using Microsoft Azure SQL Data Warehouse for about one year.

This solution is stable.

We are satisfied with the scalability.

A lot of people use the analytics and I would estimate it to be between 50 and 100 users. Most of them are business users, although some are power users who built the system for them.

It is good technical support in general, we find. We were in contact with them when we were doing a migration from on-premises to the cloud, and it was very nice.

The initial setup is straightforward.

This solution is being changed from day-to-day. Now it has become Synapse Analytics and a lot of things are being added to it. I'm curious to see how that turns out. They have a lot of new integrations and features, including predictive analysis and big data integration. They may have solved the issues with concurrent connectivity, so I'm curious to put my hands on it.

The product is being upgraded and updated to support a lot of analytic features, and it is a great tool to use.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

This is a data warehousing solution.

The most valuable feature is the scalability. It scales out, so you can build a large database and not have to think about whether it performs, or about connecting to the servers to become larger.

There are several specific features and functions available on the on-premises version that do not work with the cloud version. There are many issues regarding migration.

They are building it more and more, but if you have the same version on local you cannot just go to the cloud because some of the functionalities don't work yet. You would have to re-code everything, and maybe even do it differently.

In terms of documentation, they can make it easier or start with some advising or instruction. As it is now, it's like making a puzzle.

Technical support needs some improvement.

They will need to include some features for the Cloud version.

They can make subsets of the database so you can schedule the marking department to work only between nine to five, but ETL can run at night. 

With a subset database, you can cut costs, similar to Snowflake whose price is a lot lower.

This solution is stable.

This solution is scalable.

We have a couple of administrations using this solution and the rest are indirectly using third-party tools. They are developers and administrators.

The support is difficult. I don't think that their support is good.

You can call for help, they take your request, but they don't have an understanding of the tool.

You have to wait a couple of days for someone to call you back.

There have been times where I knew more than they did, so you have to figure it out for yourself.

I am not satisfied with the support, but I do understand that when you have a service desk or a help desk, they cannot go through the entire solution. What I expect is that the second line should, but they don't have a second line.

You submit in a support ticket and three days later you get a callback and have to explain the problem that you are having again. It takes more time.

I have called Microsoft and even they were not sure and nobody could really help me.

The initial setup for me was straightforward, but I have a lot of experience. I think that for some people who are less experienced it would be complex.

It's not just the documentation on what version you need to have and what pricing. It is really difficult.

You have to read a lot to understand what you are doing.

This solution starts at €1000.00 a month for just the basics and can go up to €300,000.00 per month for the fastest version.

It's pay as you go, so you never know what your bill is going to be beforehand, and that's scary for customers. If you have someone who makes a mistake and the program's a loop that is running all night, you could receive a very expensive bill.

The bad side to pay as you go is that sometimes it can stop the enthusiasm of the data scientists, as they are afraid to run a query because they are afraid of the bill and how much it will be.

It's a nice solution for a simple data warehousing, but it's still an immature solution.

It is stable but it takes a lot of time. 

Smaller companies have better products, but the problem will always be there and the smaller company will not survive.

Customers will have tools that are not supported anymore.

Microsoft is so big that people trust them, they will eventually get there but it will take time to get the features with quality. There are, however, some solutions available that are better and cheaper. You can purchase them instead of having to reprogram everything that you have already done.

My advice would be to compare this solution with others. Snowflake would be a comparable solution. It's cheaper, faster, and better.

I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.

Our general use of this solution has to do with the needs of one of our clients. They had an SQL server and they were migrating from an on-premises SQL Server to Azure SQL server on the cloud. We use this solution because it fits their budget and they have some clients in other countries they want to give access to the product through Power BI.

What I like the most would be MPP (Massively Parallel Processing) architecture. Because we had to migrate a lot of data and it helps us a lot to make things faster.

As far as improvements to the product, I think the Data Factory integration should be enhanced to be properly implemented because right now it is still lagging behind other vendors like Informatica. We ended up having to use Data Factory because we don't have any expertise in Informatica. But I want to see Data Factory get better overall.

An enhancement I would like to see is in data loading for Data Factory. Right now we are seeing a little bit of a performance lapse in the cloud server. Specifically, this happens between Azure and our clients maybe because we are connecting to SQL Server Management Studio. There is a slight but noticeable delay. I do not know if it has to do with Azure and whether it is their problem or our problem.

I can't complain much about Data Factory, but because I used to use SSIS (SQL Server Integration Services) which was the prior on-prem version, I know what capabilities it is missing in comparison. They changed it over to Data Factory, but by comparison, Data Factory has a long way to go to reach the level of SSIS as a product.

Right now is still early in our implementation so I can't really say that I am sure it will remain stable in production under larger loads. But so far it is good and we are happy with the solution and its stability.

One of the reasons we decided to go with Azure was because we knew we could scale-out. We were happy with this scalability before we committed to the product.

Right now, I know only two of our clients are using the solution. They are actually a government organization. But we know we can scale up when we have to.

I have not had direct contact with technical support. Someone else handles that. But I have not heard any complaints.

The initial set up was not very complex. It was easy to install this product.

We had a partnership with another team and together we did the installation. They helped us to figure out some architectural decisions which they were very helpful with.

My advice to other people considering this solution is that this is a great product. But there is one problem and that is the rate that Microsoft is changing its software implementations. The rapid changes could make it hard to keep up with upgrades. Some of the features get enabled and disabled very quickly. So we are waiting now until everything settles down because cloud technology is still evolving. We understand that. But, on the other hand, as they make so many changes to keep up with the technology, it remains hard to predict what the future of the product is. I might say to anyone that they wait for some time in 2020 and then start using the product.

On a scale from one to ten where one is the worst and ten is the best, I would rate the product as somewhere between a seven or an eight. If I have to choose seven or eight, I would pick seven-out-of-10.

The most valuable feature of this solution is the ease of administration.

It would be of interest to improve things like the web service integration and availability in terms of being easy to create internal web services in the database.

The solution is quite stable and there are no problems in the database.

We haven't grown a lot so I am not able to say if the solution is scalable or not.

The initial setup was really easy and straightforward.

I will rate this solution an eight out of ten. Not a ten due to the lack of integration.

We use the private deployment model of this solution. 

The most valuable features are the flexibility and that it's easy to use as an end-user compared to AWS.

The initial setup process needs improvement. When you're moving to the cloud it takes a bit of time. It would be great if they could implement something that would make it faster. It takes a bit of time but once you're done, you're done. 

The simplicity is good, but it should be that anyone can use it. You shouldn't have to be technical because, with the way it is now, only a technical person who has had training can set it up. If you have a dashboard that anyone can use, it would be easier.

Scalability is great. It can go from zero to infinity. 

Their technical support is great. We have local support from distributors.

The pricing is okay. You can pay as you go. 

I would rate it a seven out of ten.