Snowflake Reviews

We use it as a traditional data warehousing application that we then set all of our reporting tools on top of.

We are able to consolidate multiple databases into one unified table for more complete reporting. That wasn't possible in our legacy tool that we were using because the query time was just too long. Now we're able to create this unified view of our entire organization and refresh it every 15 minutes; using the power of Snowflake's query is pretty much our biggest use case there.

The query speed, and the way that it actually executes its queries is the most valuable aspect of the solution. We had some queries that would take hours upon hours to run, and the Snowflake returns the results in about 15 minutes.

It requires no maintenance on our part. They handle all that. The speed is phenomenal. The pricing isn't really anything more than what you would be paying for a SQL server license or another tool to execute the same thing. We have zero maintenance on our side to do anything and the speed at which it performs queries and loads the data is amazing. It handles unstructured data extremely well, too. So, if the data is in a JSON array or an XML, it handles that super well.

One area for improvement would be the stored procedures. Currently, their stored procedures can only be executed at a transactional level versus being able to run and do updates and run things in a sequence.

An additional feature I'd like to see is called materialized views, which can speed up some run times. I'd like it to be able to be used where you can have multiple tables inside them; materialized view. That would be nice. As well as being able to run cursors, to be able to do some bulk updates and some more advanced querying, table building on the fly.

I've been using Snowflake for about four years now.

The stability has been phenomenal up until lately. We haven't had any issues until the last month. For the four years prior it was always on; we didn't have any outages. All in all the stability is great. The availability is extremely high. There's just been something in the last month that has caused outages for some periods of hours.

It's definitely scalable. We're on a very small usage compared to some of the other clients I know Snowflake has, so it's definitely scalable because we have tons of room to grow for our use.

Including myself, we currently have five users and they're data analysts.

I've only used their customer service in one or two instances, and they were very supportive and helpful. The tool is so user-friendly and straightforward that I've never really had to engage their professional services.

We didn't really have a traditional data warehouse application. We were just using Microsoft SQL Server, but we didn't actually have a traditional MPP-based data warehouse solution. We were still a very growing organization. As we continue to grow our business and increase in size, we have to get better tools that are meant to actually do what we're trying to do with other tools.

The initial setup was pretty straightforward. The permissioning is a little more complicated than it needs to be. It would be nice if it just assumed permissions when you create new tables or new users, but you do have to go and actually permission to everything for individuals and people rather than when you create something. It's just because there's no default role that applies to new stuff created so it's a little more complicated than it should be.

Our deployment took about one month. I'm the only one involved in the maintenance of the solution now.

We hired an ETL specialist to come in and get us set up, but he really didn't understand our business and what we were trying to accomplish. So everything he did, we pretty much paid for and then redid ourselves. But it was pretty straightforward using tools that are built for ETL processes. Understanding the SnowSQL command line tool to a certain degree also helps.

We don't really have it commercialized or revenue-generating in any way, but what we've seen with it is we've been able to remove all of our reporting and other data needs off of production application. So we're not putting extra stress on things that we need to always have up and running in order to operate the business. That's really our security. It's more of a favorite blanket if you will, is where we're seeing the benefits.

For our licensing, we renew every January by $25,000 in both credits.

Their pricing structure is a pay-per-second usage in terms of credits, but you can get discounts if you buy them in bulk. I think it's $1.10 an hour in terms of usage. We just buy upfront and that gets us taken care of for the whole year.

We did. I evaluated Google BigQuery and Amazon Redshift.

In terms of distinguishing features between each of them, it was really just two things. One was the speed factor of query times. The other thing that really sold us on Snowflake was their ability for data sharing. They have a unique product as part of their solution that you can share information directly with other individuals, either in their own additional private cloud or if they're not Snowflake customers, simply sharing a URL link to where they can receive data themselves.

It's good to use every day. It's the backbone of our entire reporting platform for both internal and external deployments of reports and visibility. We plan on continuing to grow our usage with it, as we put more and more people into our reporting platforms and bring our customers into more self-service that's going to increase the usage of the tool by the way that it actually serves up the information to the BI platform.

It's not at this time a transactional sort of database solution. It's truly only meant for data warehousing or data laking, and there's a lot of different ways to do role-level security. So you've got to have a good plan on that, but if you're looking for it to be the backbone of a transactional application, it's not the right tool for that.

I would rate this solution a ten out of ten.

For Snowflake, we had four main use cases. The first use case was related to a data warehouse, and my banking client wanted to move his SQL Server database to Snowflake. All the source systems were also on Oracle and file-based systems, and the target data warehouse was SQL Server. From SQL Server, the client wanted to move to Snowflake. 

The second use case was related to a chat or messaging client. They were using EMR Hadoop as their data warehouse, but it was not performing, so we had to move the EMR Hadoop to Snowflake. 

The third use case was related to a ServiceNow compliance system, where ServiceNow was using SAP HANA for its reporting data warehouse, but it was too slow. It was not performing, and it was causing a lot of problems. We moved that ServiceNow compliance system from SAP HANA to Snowflake.

The fourth use case was related to a huge SQL Server database for a banking client. We moved the entire SQL database to Snowflake. 

Data sharing is a good feature. It is a majorly used feature. The elastic compute is another big feature. Separating compute and storage gives you flexibility. 

It doesn't require much DBA involvement because it doesn't need any performance tuning. We are not really doing any performance tuning, and the entire burden of performance tuning and SQL tuning is on Snowflake.

Its usability is very good. I don't need to ramp up any user, and its onboarding is easier. You just onboard the user, and you are done with it. There are simple SQL and UI, and people are able to use this solution easily. Ease of use is a big thing in Snowflake.

Portability is a big hurdle right now for our clients. Porting all of your existing SQL ecosystem, such as stored procedures, to Snowflake is a major pain point. Currently, Snowflake stored procedures use JavaScript, but they should support SQL-based stored procedures. It would be a huge advantage if you can write your stored procedures using SQL. 

It seems that they are working on this feature, and they are yet to release it. I remember seeing some notes saying that they were going to do that in the future, but the sooner this feature comes out, it would be better for Snowflake because there are a lot of clients with whom I'm interacting, and their main hurdle is to take their existing Oracle or SQL Server stored procedures and move them into Snowflake. For this, you need to learn JavaScript and how it works, which is not easy and becomes a little tricky. If it supports SQL-based procedures, then you can just cut-paste the SQL code, run it, and easily fix small issues. 

I have been using this solution for three years.

So far, with all four clients who have this solution, I have not seen any problem that stands out and causes major headaches or something like that.

Its scalability is really good. You can scale in both ways. You can actually scale up and down or scale out. Scaling up and down is done where we have an extra small warehouse, and we are moving to small, medium, large, or something like that. If you have a query that is running slow or a lot of data you are dealing with is slow, you can scale up. If you want to scale down from large to small, you can do that. 

If you want to get concurrency, scale-out architecture is available. I can actually do a cluster-based architecture where I can have two clusters, three clusters, or something like that. This way the concurrency can be improved.

In terms of the number of users, we have around 200 users.

They have a website where you have to go and raise your tickets. They resolve the ticket, and they are working fine. 

They don't actually entertain emails nowadays because the company has become big. I remember initially interacting with them through email. Now they don't do that. They clearly say not to send emails and go through the ticketing process, which makes sense. For a big company, it is not possible to track emails.

It is not complex. It is straightforward. It is a very simple database anyway. It is just having a script and running them. 

The only thing is that you have to go through the whole nine yards of getting an account or getting your single sign-on enabled. That is a part of every process. For any single sign-on application, you will have to go through this process. 

You also need to involve the right people, such as the security team, infrastructure team, and networking team. When they are there, the setup becomes easier, and there are no problems.

For its maintenance, we have only two or three people. We have one DBA and one account admin. There is another DBA who will take a rotation. You don't really need a big team to manage this because it is all cloud. Management is not that heavy.

Snowflake goes by credits. For a financial institution where you have 5,000 employees, monthly costs may run up to maybe $5,000 to $6,000. This is actually based on the usage. It is mostly the compute cost. Your computing cost is the variable that is actually based on your usage. It is pay-per-use. In a pay-per-use case, you won't be spending more than $6,000 to $7,000 a month. It is not more than that for a small or medium enterprise, and it may come down to $100K per year.

Storage is very standard, which is $23 a terabyte. It is not much for any enterprise. If you have even 20 terabytes, you are not spending more than $400 per month, which may turn out to be $2,000 to $3,000 per annum. 

When comparing it with SAP HANA, there is no one solution that fits all. Snowflake is useful if you have a SaaS-based product such as Salesforce, Workday, Anaplan, and Greenhouse. You can get the data from this type of SaaS-based system and ingest data.

SAP is born out of the entire ERP ecosystem. You have enterprise resource planning, and you have manufacturing, finance, and other systems. Big manufacturing industries usually implement ERPs because they want to do reporting, etc. SAP has this custom box stuff, and it is very difficult to get the data out of your SAP systems. So, you have to use SAP HANA. If you're not using the SAP systems, you don't really need SAP HANA. You are free to go for Snowflake. If you have an ERP system and you need to get the data out and move into an SAP or ERP system, and you want to have a data warehouse actually of ERP system, then SAP HANA makes more sense because it can natively talk to SAP. In such a case, you don't want to go for Snowflake. 

I would advise looking at your environment. Look at the workload and what you are trying to migrate. There is no one size fits all model. If you are a transaction system and you want to go with Snowflake, I would not advise this solution. If you are a reporting system and you want to migrate, Snowflake is the best choice. 

You also need to look at what kind of queries people are running. Don't assume that just because you are moving to Snowflake, you are going to cut down the cost by some factor. That is not going to happen. You need to really do a lot of homework and groundwork to know what kind of queries you're running and how can you avoid the compute costs. There is a lot of metadata available in Snowflake. You have to look at all that and then consciously try to improve the numbers. 

It is definitely a good tool and a good database without any adoption problems. Users who are SQL savvy can immediately adopt this solution. User onboarding is not really a huge exercise. It is a very simple exercise.

I would rate Snowflake an eight out of ten.

The solution has use cases related to retail stores and sales.

The most valuable features of Snowflake are that you have to pay per usage, and you don't have to worry about the maintenance of the data warehouse because it is on the cloud.

The solution’s pricing could be cheaper. It would be helpful if Snowflake could create good reports instead of using Power BI reports.

I rate the solution a nine out of ten for stability.

Snowflake is a scalable solution. We have four to five customers for Snowflake who use it regularly.

The solution’s initial setup is straightforward.

The solution's deployment in a development environment takes only a couple of minutes.

Users have to pay a licensing fee for the solution, which is expensive.

Snowflake is deployed on the cloud. The solution is providing HIPAA compliance, which is sufficient. Users looking for a pay-as-you-use product available on Azure or AWS should consider Snowflake.

Overall, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.

I use it for data warehousing. I just design databases, put data in there, and get data out.

Although I haven't used it much, it is very fast and the performance is great.

It has some technical quirks that whoever is using it needs to be aware of. It doesn't enforce typical relational database constraints. If you're not aware of that, you can really put some bad data in there.

I've been using it for about three months.

I would give it a ten out of ten. I haven't seen it failover.

I've never had any issues with it. It is being extensively used. We have between a hundred and a thousand users using Snowflake.

I have not had any experience with customer support, but I've heard it's good.

I've heard it's quite expensive.

I would give Snowflake a seven out of ten.

We use the solution to build the pipelines in stream sets, including data source, data warehouse, and destination endpoints.

The solution's most valuable features are storage, run time, scalability, and minimum query time compared to other vendors.

The solution's stability needs improvement.

I have been using the solution for seven or eight months.

Recently, I encountered an issue with the solution's data warehouse. The resource monitor had exceeded its quota. I rate its stability as an eight.

I rate the solution's scalability as a nine.

We use Hive and Hadoop as well. Snowflake is more stable and scalable.

The solution is more straightforward to use than the other IDBMS tools. It has a simple query process. Its computing time is less as well. One can easily have access to it. I rate it as a nine.

I am using Snowflake for all our apps and data warehousing requirements.

The most valuable feature of Snowflake is it's an all-in-one data warehousing solution. 

Snowflake could improve migration. It should be made easier. It would be beneficial if it could offer some OLTP features. One of our customers was using Oracle for both data warehousing and OLTP workloads, and they were able to migrate their data warehousing workloads to Snowflake without major issues. However, for some of their OLTP requirements, such as needing a response time of fewer than 10 milliseconds for certain queries, Snowflake is currently unable to provide that.

It would be beneficial to see more integration and reporting tools embedded within the platform, similar to what Microsoft offers with its data warehouse and database solutions. Oracle, on the other hand, does not have such features. While Snowflake has a lot of options available on its marketplace, it would be helpful if it could provide more optimal options for users who are migrating from other environments. It would be great if they could follow the same path as Microsoft in this regard.

I have been using Snowflake for approximately one year.

Snowflake is stable.

We have two clients using this solution.

The solution is highly scalable.

We don't have direct support for Snowflake as we support our clients. If any support is required, our clients connect with Snowflake's support team and get the necessary assistance. They own the support account.

The initial setup of Snowflake is easy. We only need to create a login, there is no conventional setup.

When it comes to migrating from a previous platform to Snowflake, it largely depends on the size of the data warehouse, the number of integrations, the existing data pipelines, and the type of data sources. The complexity and size of the current deployment will determine how difficult the migration process will be.

The ROI appears good on paper, particularly in terms of cost reduction in operations. However, as companies have only been using Snowflake for a year and it's hard to say for sure. It looks promising for now, but it will take a year or so to see if it holds up in practice.

Snowflake is a cloud-based solution that uses a pay-as-you-go model. The storage and processing are separated, and you are mainly charged for the processing power you use. Additionally, there is a charge for storage, but the primary cost comes from the processing. You can choose different sizes of processing units, also known as warehouses, for your specific workload or requirements. You pay for the per-second utilization of those computing resources.

Snowflake is cost-effective. However, the cost can depend on how it's being used and how efficiently the code is written. If engineers don't write efficient code and usage is billed based on processing, it can become costly. If they write optimal code and choose the best solution, it can reduce costs in comparison to other options, such as Oracle.

I would recommend this solution to others.

I rate Snowflake an eight out of ten.

The most valuable feature is the clone copy.

In a future release we would like to have a link which would allow us to connect to an external database and create certain views in your own database. This is because it is becoming hard for us to compare the data between multiple sources.

I have used this solution for two years.

This is a stable solution. 

This is a scalable solution. 

The technical support of Snowflake is good. 

Positive

We have seen ROI when using Snowflake based on the insights we get.

I would recommend the SaaS version for their organization. It is not complicated to use. Establishing a private link with current cloud services has been challenging so I would recommend having some kind of a block.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten. 

Snowflake is used for data warehousing.

The most valuable features of Snowflake are its performance and power.

Snowflake could improve if they had an Operational Data Store(ODS) space.

I have been using Snowflake for approximately four years.

The stability of Snowflake is good.

The scalability of Snowflake is very good.

I have approximately six customers using this solution but in addition, I am directing more.

The technical support from Snowflake was poor previously, they have improved significantly.

Snowflake has an easy setup and it is quick.

There is a license needed to use this solution. There are a few licensing options available. They have a pay-as-you-go option, but it is recommended to pay upfront.

I would recommend this solution to others.

I rate Snowflake a nine out of ten.