Snowflake Reviews

I am using Snowflake for migrating data and table backups.

The most valuable feature of Snowflake is its performance. We can access the data quickly. Additionally, it handles structured and non-structured data.

The solution could improve by allowing non-structured data, such as PDFs, images, or videos. We cannot see the data.

I have been using Snowflake for approximately three years.

The stability of Snowflake is good.

Snowflake is a scalable solution.

We have approximately 200 to 300 people using the solution.

The initial setup of Snowflake is easy.

If the use case fits the solution then I would recommend it. For example, if you have large data and want the rational database backed up, this solution would be a good choice.

I rate Snowflake an eight out of ten.

Our current plan and use case for this solution is to migrate the data from on-premises to the cloud. We are currently using on-prem monitor data and providing it on the cloud. We are using Snowflake so that once the data is in there, we are trying to create shares over it so that external systems can't consume it.

The features I found most valuable with this solution are sharing options and built-in time zone conversion.

I see room for improvement when it comes to credit performance. The other thing I'd like to be improved is the warehouse facility. 

In the next release, I'd like to see easier connectivity to the on-premises tools.

I have been using this solution for about three years.

My impression from using this product for the last three years is that it is quite stable.

My impression is that this is a scalable solution. There are around 200 users of this solution at our company, including three administrators.

The initial setup process was not that complex and it took around six months.

The implementation was done by an in-house team.

My impression is that the pricing of this solution is reasonable.

I would rate this solution a seven, on a scale from one to 10, with one being the worst and 10 being the best.

The use cases are data warehousing, data pipelining, data engineering, reporting, and dashboarding. Instead of using Oracle or other systems, you can simply put Snowflake there. It works like a normal database. This way, you avoid consuming the system with extra data. So the experience so far is good.

One of Snowflake’s most valuable features is that you don't need to worry about computing. You don't need to scale up the compute size. When you are using a compute pay-per-use model and the storage is cheap, the data can go from terabytes to petabytes. In this case, you don't need to procure any new hardware or software, it automatically scales up.

I think the problem is maybe the design of the product. It is supposed to be a warehouse product, you can't expect it to be a transaction system. It is not designed for transaction systems. It's purposely built for data warehouses. So people cannot expect to use Snowflake for transaction systems. They misunderstand the product.

So I would not call it a product negative. I would say it's more of a user error, for example, people using a hammer for something else. But that's a problem. It works perfectly fine, otherwise.

They need to work on the design. That would suffice.

I have been using Snowflake day in and day out for four and a half years now.

It’s a stable product. I don't think there is any problem. I think the product is engineered well.

It is good at scaling. You can scale it horizontally or scale vertically. That's a big plus. Scaling easily is a big thing.

They are really good and responsive. I normally raise the ticket and they immediately come back with an email. They keep posting updates and follow-up promptly.

There is no setup issue at all. It's very smooth. You need to do a simple login. If you're doing the initial setup, it's maybe a couple of days of work. That's it. If you are migrating or want to do a proper new database setup, it's just a day's work.

We use Snowflake pretty heavily. We pay a significant amount of money for the tool. I'd say we pay $300k to $400K every year.

It's a great product. I think people don't need to stick to traditional Oracle systems and rather go for Snowflake. There you don't need to worry about any updates. It is a cloud product, so it automatically updates regularly. The advice is to get used to this way of working as it's new. You have to get familiar with the technology, and a little bit of the terminology. It's a very good product. I would rate it eight out of ten.

We use the solution as a data warehouse for our financial services firm. 

The core feature of the platform is everything works, and that's what I like about it. Our time to market is faster, it requires less maintenance, and I can build and deploy a product exceptionally quickly.

Everything is automatic, and I don't have to do any maintenance.

I want tokenization, so they could either acquire a company that does tokenization or somehow integrate with one. If I could do tokenization in line with other development without having a third-party system, that would ease integration and security, of course.

More data governance and access control features would be a welcome addition.

We have been using Snowflake for about three and a half years. 

Snowflake is a stable platform. 

The power of Snowflake is that it scales automatically and indefinitely. We have around 500 internal users using the solution daily, and most of our applications use the product in some shape or form, so that's a few hundred thousand external users.

The support model is that we have a Snowflake rep, and if I need anything, I can reach out to him, and he can get people on board within minutes. The support is fantastic.

Positive

We weren't satisfied with our data warehouse, AWS Redshift, Oracle, and some on-prem elements such as a SQL Server. We wanted a cloud data warehouse that didn't require a lot of manual intervention and maintenance, DBAs and so on. We wanted a solution that could scale automatically and pay-as-you-go to cut down on wasteful infrastructure. Therefore, Snowflake made a lot of sense, plus compared to Redshift at the time, the separation of storage and computing was huge. That was an essential differentiator for us.

We previously used ThoughtSpot, specifically their Falcon engine, their appliance version, and it did everything on its own. We brought in Snowflake later when ThoughtSpot introduced their product called Embrace. We were among the earliest adopters to switch, and six to eight months after, we integrated with Snowflake.

The initial setup was straightforward; it was one of the easiest I've done, so I rate the solution five out of five for ease of setup.

We carried out the deployment in-house, and Snowflake is a SaaS solution, so setup was rapid. All we needed was some user account information. 

Snowflake is expensive, but when I consider what we get for that price, it's fair. I rate the solution three out of five for affordability, right in the middle. 

I rate the solution nine out of ten. 

Snowflake is ahead of the competitors because it's completely automatic and hands-off in terms of maintenance. Many of the competitor products have similar features to Snowflake, but what they call automatic still requires someone to understand it. If they give us 100 levers, somebody has to know what each of them does and when to pull them, whereas Snowflake is entirely hands-off.

My advice to potential customers is to have a team member who understands performance tuning and to figure out optimal credit usage ahead of time to avoid wasteful spending.

The implementation is essential because the solution provides a lot of power out of the box, and the initial configuration needs to be fit for purpose. If I have a relatively small use case where I don't need much power or don't have much data, the product needs to be configured for that. As opposed to an external case where I might need high power for a government job, for example, then the configuration needs to be scaled up.

Snowflake is our centralized data warehouse. We bring all of our business critical information to Snowflake. It also powers all of our dashboard's reporting and analytical models.

Snowflake has improved our organization by powering company-wide dashboards that functions use to understand and manage their business. We also have dashboards that go up to our board of directors and our C-suite. Snowflake allows us to have up-to-date, consistent, and useful reporting for the entire company.

I found Snowflake's performance to be its most valuable feature. The product is an incredibly fast and performant data warehouse. We handle a lot of semi-structured data natively with it, which is nice. 

I also appreciate Snowflake's scalability. As the company has grown, as the number of Snowflake users have grown, I have not had any issue scaling.

There is room for improvement in Snowflake's integration with Python. We do a lot of SQL programming in Snowflake, but we go to a different tool to program when we have to in Python. However, I know this is an area that Snowflake's working on.

I have been using Snowflake for a year and a half at my current company. I have an additional six years of previous experience. 

Snowflake is incredibly stable. I have never had an issue with Snowflake outages.

Snowflake is scalable both in terms of the amount of data that you can run through it and the number of users that engage with it. We have five direct users and then, because Snowflake powers all the dashboards, 250 indirect users.

We plan to increase our Snowflake usage in the future. As we send more data through it and build out more sophisticated dashboards and reporting and especially statistical modeling, we will increase our usage.

I have not had a lot of issues with Snowflake, so I haven't had to utilize technical support that much. But when I have had issues, I received a response in a couple days, not the same day. The responses sometimes help solve the issue and sometimes not. The technical support could be better. 

Neutral

I did not previously use a different solution at my current company. 

The initial setup was very straightforward. 

Our employment was done in-house. In fact, I did it myself. 

We have seen a return on investment with Snowflake. 

We spend between $30,000 and $50,000 a year for Snowflake licensing.

I did not evaluate other options. I have been using Snowflake for so long and it has been so good for me to use that didn't need to.

I think Snowflake is fantastic for both storing data and querying your data, but you should always maintain visibility into your costs. They can run up and get out of control if you're not aware of who's using Snowflake and why.

We are currently using this product for data lake and data warehouse projects. Snowflake creates our repositories and enables the view from other tools like Docker and Power BI to create that data mesh. We use the data to create a process inside the warehouse. We are customers of Snowflake and I'm the senior manager of information technology infrastructure.

Snowflake is user-friendly and reliable in creating the data warehouse and carrying out data modeling. 

I'd like to see the data science functionality improved to a degree that would enable data scientists to work together with the data engineering team. The solution is focused on SQL and some kind of language or free support would be useful and would add some functionality to the machine-learning process. 

The current API is very limited and difficult to configure. It's not easy to create an API and start changing data so some kind of API to expose the data would be good. We use Docker to check the data but if we could get an API that allows other tools to access the data that would be great. 

I've been using this solution for two years. 

The scalability is good. There are around 35 people in the company using Snowflake and six engineers dealing with maintenance. 

The technical support is good. 

Positive

The initial setup was simple and took about a month. The main point is to align the data governance and integration process because you only need to click a button to start. We had a service engineer from Snowflake help with that.

If you use the tool well, you'll see ROI from your investment.

It's important to understand the licensing model because if you're paying for the software, you're not necessarily aware of the use. It's important to monitor how you're using the resources otherwise you can find yourself in a difficult situation. Licensing costs depend on the agreement you have with Snowflake.

I rate this solution nine out of 10. 

We're ingesting third-party data analytics into a database held within Snowflake. We have pre-production and production environments with integration to staging and production schemas.

It has improved the way our organization functions. However, we're still pretty elementary in our understanding of how it all works and the complete capabilities of Snowflake.

The adaptation to development languages is most valuable. Our developers can SQL code or something else. It has been convenient in that regard.

The data sharing capabilities across business units within the organization should be better. There could also be better integration.

I have been using Snowflake for a year and three months.

We have high confidence in it.

We have high confidence in its scalability. In terms of its users, for our solution, we only have a team of 10, but we have plans to increase its usage.

We haven't had any technical contact. All of it has been internal for our organization.

This is a net-new solution. So, it's brand new. We chose Snowflake for a variety of reasons, but mainly, we chose it for its scalability and data sharing capabilities.

I would rate it a three out of five in terms of complexity just because we didn't have any Snowflake developers that were available. The implementation took about three months.

We implemented it on our own.

We have not yet seen an ROI.

We're based on credits. So, we're paying four and a half dollars of credit. There are no additional costs. I would rate it a two out of five in terms of pricing.

I would advise ensuring that you have the expertise with domain knowledge in Snowflake. The time from initial concept to deployment could be expedited extremely fast. Just from our internal learnings, we see that our time to production has increased month over month.

I would rate it a six out of ten just because we're unaware or naive to the full capabilities of the product. However, I would highly recommend it in terms of setting up data warehousing internally over an Azure solution, such as Synapse, or something else.

We have day-in and day-out data coming from our various heterogeneous source systems. We read from that and we load data into our target tables, or rather data lake and data warehouse that is built into Snowflake. We can even translate and delete items. Apart from that, we use the tasks and schedule jobs within Snowflake. Once the data is generated into the final data material, we share it with the client for their review.

Time travel is one feature that really helps us out. If there is some data discrepancy or something wrong that happens with the table, at any point, we can get that data back and time travel via fail-safe features. They're really good. 

The feasibility to increase horizontal or vertical scaling is great. It really helps a developer at an enterprise level. If you're considering scaling, it won't take much time. 

We can create cloning via Snowflake. There's a lot of time savings.

The initial setup is simple. 

The solution could use a little bit more UI. Something was in process, however, it's not yet deployed or in the version that I'm using it is not deployed. If we have to use any table or any schema in other DB features, the prompt comes over after a dot. Whenever we are using it it would really help if it looked better. 

If you're running a procedure, it just gives a standard error instead of the exact error captured. If you have to look at it, you need to go into the history to look into which query failed, and we need to figure it out. Instead, if the error, whatever it is, is instead displayed in the history, showing the point of failure, it would be more visible. It would save some time for all the people who are using it.

There are some reporting analytics that we can use. I'm aware of those. However, if there was more reporting, we'd appreciate that. We'd like for it to become a complete one-stop-shop solution. 

We'd like to have some automation around small tasks, especially around scheduling.

I've been working on the solution for two years. 

In the past three years, I have faced instability. In just one or two instances, I would say when we were running the queries, it was not fetching any result and the error was not proper. That said, that happened in just one or two instances, in the lower environments. Otherwise, the product is very stable.

The solution is quite scalable both horizontally and vertically. It's an easy job. We just need to resize it. 

Within our module, there are around eight to ten people who are working on Snowflake. In a full project, if I'm looking at the holistic picture, there are around 30 to 40 people who are using Snowflake.

We've reached out to technical support in the past. In some cases, we were not even able to fetch the data. Or, a couple of times, in the time traveler, the pay phase time was expired and we had to retrieve that data. When that happened, we had to reach out to Snowflake support. In the first instance, they said there was downtime at that server, which we were not informed about. Since it was in the lower environment, it didn't cause an issue. 

Overall, the technical support was really good. They were on it. They helped as much as they could. For a few things they needed some approvals, and they took that. They got back to us in even less time than was required by the SLA.

Positive

We are also working with Teradata.

The main difference is that Snowflake is on a cloud server and Teradata is still a legacy system. Teradata was one of our source systems. We were loading it into Snowflake. With Teradata, when you create primary care, something constrains the way you want to do it so that you do not put an additional effort into your ETL. That changes when it comes to Snowflake. If you're clustering something on a case, obviously you end up paying the extra cost. That is one basic and main difference that we saw.

That said, you can process a huge amount of data in Snowflake. This becomes a challenge in Teradata. When we were reading the data, we had to load that data into Snowflake. When we were trying to read that data, we had to obviously divide it into chunks and then load it into Snowflake. Loading into Snowflake was like a cakewalk. Everything is moving into the cloud now. Legacy systems like Teradata just can't handle the amount of data required. 

I've worked on many of the legacy systems like Oracle, DB2, et cetera. Migration from one environment to a higher environment was a huge thing. The DVS used to take two or three days sometimes depending on how many tables or what the objects are and what they had to create. Now, with the cloning feature that we have, the idle time for the developers, or even the people who are looking at the data, the analysts, and everyone, is reduced to none. We just clone it, we load the data and the data is available without any hindrances.

The solution is straightforward. 

My Azure ID was created by the DBA. As soon as I had to log in, my user role was set up. To log in to the interface hardly took me more than two or three minutes. Compared to our Data Bricks, it was pretty simple. It's hassle-free. 

The maintenance of the DBs and the production services are normally taken care of by the team itself who's handling the production support. However, just in case, if there is something, if a huge mishap happens, which we cannot recover, or we would need Snowflake customer support help, that is when the help is taken. Otherwise, the team handles everything in-house. 

The majority of the cases that we have seen are some queries stuck somewhere and out of the blue. In the case of some source data, it decides to send you a huge amount of data on a particular day. While we have seen some mishaps, a regular case requires our developers to deal with it.

We handled the initial setup in-house. 

The pricing is fair for all the features that Snowflake is providing. The way Snowflake has emerged in the past few years is impressive. It was just a beginner in the space, and it has become a leader in the market. For all the features it provides at a basic cost, it is impressive.

There are no extra costs involved unless you need to scale and grow and need more in terms of size. When we started, a medium-size was sufficient. We'd since needed more. 

The solution allows us to suspend our warehouse as well if we would like. 

That said, even if you're paying a little more cost for the data safety that you have, you will ensure that there is no data loss that will happen. It's very impressive.

My past company was a Snowflake customer. This current company is not, however, it may be on the verge of it. 

I'm using the latest version of the solution. We switched clouds at some point. I was using it on AWS, and now it is on Azure. 

I'd recommend the solution to others. I would rate it nine out of ten.