Apache Spark Reviews

It's a root product that we use in our pipeline.

We have some input data. For example, we have one system that supplies some data to MongoDB, for example, and we pull this data from MongoDB, enrich this data from other systems - with some additional fields - and write to S3 for other systems. Since we have a lot of data, we need a parallel process that runs hourly.

We use batch processing. It works well with our formats and file versions. There's a lot of functionality. 

In our pipeline each hour, we make a copy of data from MongoDB, of the changes from MongoDB to some specific file. Each time pipeline copied all of the data, it would do it each time without changes to all of the tables. Tables have a lot of data, and in the last MongoDB version, there is a possibility to read only changed data. This reduced the cost and configuration of the cluster, and we saved about $150,000.

The solution is scalable.

It's a stable product.

The primary language for developers on Spark is Scala. Now it's also about Java. I prefer Java versus Scala, and since they are supported, it is good. I know there is always discussion about which language to write applications in, and some people do love Scala. However, I don't like it.

They use currently have a JDK version which is a little bit old. Not all features are on it. Maybe they should pull support of the JDK version.

I've used the solution for a year and a half. 

The solution is stable. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. 

The product scales well. It's fine to expand if needed. 

Many teams use Spark. For example, we have a few kinds of pipelines, huge pipelines. One of them processes 300 billion events each day. It's our core technology currently.

We do not plan to increase usage. We keep our legacy system on Spark, and we are now discussing Flink and Spark and what we would prefer. However, most of the people are already migrating new systems to Flink. We will keep Spark for a few more years still. 

We have an internal team, and they participate in process of developing Spark. They are Spark contributors, and if we have some problems, we turn to them. It's our own people, yet they work with Spark. Generally, if the problem is more minor, we look at some sites or have some discussion about Spark or internal guys who have experience with Spark. 

We also use Flink.

Before Spark, I worked with another company that we used some different technology, including Kafka, Radius, Postgres SQL, S3, and Spring. 

I didn't handle the initial setup. We were using this pipeline and clusters already. I just installed it on my local server. However, in terms of difficulty, I didn't see any problem. The deployment might only take a few hours. 

I found some documentation. I got the documentation from the site and downloaded the archive and unzipped it, and installed it. I can't say that I installed something from a special configuration. I just installed a few nodes for debugging and for running locally, and that's all. Also, in one case I used, for example, a Docker configuration with Spark. It all worked fine.

It's an open-source product. I don't know much about the licensing aspect. 

We have compared Flink and Spark as two possible options. 

I can recommend the product. It's a nice system for batch processing huge data.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten. 

We use the product for real-time data analysis.

Apache Spark provides a very high-quality implementation of distributed data processing. I rate it 20 on a scale of one to ten.

There were some problems related to the product's compatibility with a few Python libraries. But I suppose they are fixed.

We have been using Apache Spark for the last two to three years.

I rate the product's stability a ten out of ten.

The product is enormously scalable.

The initial setup process is simple if you are a good professional. You have to select a few parameters and press enter. It is already integrated into Databricks platform. One person is enough to manage small and medium implementations.

It is an open-source platform. We do not pay for its subscription.

We are evaluating a few analytics engineering and DBT solutions. For now, Spark is in the secondary position.

I recommend Apache Spark for batch analytics features.

We are a software solutions company that serves a variety of industries, including banking, insurance, and industrial sectors. The product is specifically employed for managing data platforms for our customers.

The solution, as a package, excels across the board. I appreciate everything, not just one or two specific features.

The solution’s integration with other platforms should be improved.

I have been using the solution for the past eight years. Currently, I’m using the latest version of the solution.

The solution is highly stable. I rate it a perfect ten.

The solution is highly scalable. I rate it a perfect ten.

The initial setup was straightforward and was conducted on the cloud. The entire deployment process took just 15 minutes. The deployment process involves provisioning the computational part tool using Terraform.

The solution is affordable and there are no additional licensing costs.

I recommend using the solution. Overall, I rate the solution a perfect ten.

We use the product for extensive data analysis. It helps us analyze a huge amount of data and transfer it to data scientists in our organization.

The product’s most valuable feature is the SQL tool. It enables us to create a database and publish it. It is a useful feature for us.

At the initial stage, the product provides no container logs to check the activity. It remains inactive for a long time without giving us any information. The containers could start quickly, similar to that of Jupyter Notebook.

We have been using Apache Spark for eight months to one year.

It is a stable product. I rate its stability an eight out of ten.

We have 45 Apache Spark users. I rate its scalability a nine out of ten.

The complexity of the initial setup depends on the kind of environment an organization is working with. It requires one executive for deployment. I rate the process an eight out of ten.

The product is expensive, considering the setup. However, from a standalone perspective, it is inexpensive.

I advise others to analyze data and understand your business requirements before purchasing the product. I rate it an eight out of ten.

We use Apache Spark for storage and processing.

The most valuable feature of Apache Spark is its flexibility.

Apache Spark's GUI and scalability could be improved.

I have been using Apache Spark for four to five years.

Around 15 data scientists are using Apache Spark in our organization.

Apache Spark's initial setup is slightly complex compared to other other solutions. Data scientists could install our previous tools with minimal supervision, whereas Apache Spark requires some IT support. Apache Spark's installation is a time-consuming process because it requires ensuring that all the ports have been accessed properly following certain guidelines.

While installing Apache Spark, I must look at the documentation and be very specific about the configuration settings. Only then I'll be able to install it.

Apache Spark is an expensive solution.

I would recommend Apache Spark to other users.

Overall, I rate Apache Spark an eight out of ten.

We use it as an ETL tool to gather information from different systems. The product is useful for analytics.

The product could improve the user interface and make it easier for new users. It has a steep learning curve.

I have been using the product for approximately three to four years. Currently, I am using the latest version.

The tool is stable. I rate the stability a ten out of ten.

The tool is very scalable. I rate the scalability a ten out of ten. Approximately 30 users are using Apache Spark in our organization.

We are using the free version of the product. So, we are not using any support.

Positive

The basic installation is easy. However, we are working in the security business and need a very secure installation. It has been quite difficult. I rate the basic installation a ten out of ten. I rate the ease of setup a two or three out of ten for a more secure installation with all the security features. The solution is deployed on-premises in our organization. The deployment process requires a couple of weeks.

We are using the free version of the solution.

I would recommend the product. I think it's a good solution for analytics. Overall, I rate the product an eight out of ten.

Predominantly, I use Spark for data analysis on top of datasets containing tens of millions of records.

I have an example. We had a single-threaded application that used to run for about four to five hours, but with Spark, it got reduced to under one hour.

The distribution of tasks, like the seamless map-reduce functionality, is quite impressive. For the user, it appears as simple single-line data manipulations, but behind the scenes, the executor pool intelligently distributes the map and reduce functions.

The visualization could be improved.

I have been working with Apache Spark for only a few months, not too long.

I haven't faced any stability issues. It has been stable in my experience.

When it comes to the scalability of Spark, it's primarily a processing engine, not a database engine. I haven't tested it extensively with large record sizes.

In my organization, quite a few people are using Spark. In my smaller team, there are only two users.

In terms of maintenance, when the load hits around 95%, we need to prioritize scripts and analysis within the team. 

We coordinate and prioritize based on the available resources. If there were self-service tools or better hand-holding for such situations, it would make things easier.

Currently, we extensively use pandas and Polaris. We are leveraging Docker and Kubernetes as a framework, along with AWS Batch for distribution. This is the closest substitute we have for Spark Distribution.

Both Docker and Kubernetes are more general-purpose solutions. If someone is already using Kubernetes and it's provided as a service, it can be used for special-purpose utilization, similar to Docker and Kubernetes.

In such cases, users may need to write the parallelization logic themselves, but it's relatively easy to onboard and start with a distributed load. Spark, on the other hand, is primarily used for special-purpose utilization. Users typically choose Spark when they have data-intensive tasks.

Another significant issue with Spark is its syntactics. For instance, if we have libraries like Panda or Polaris, we can run them single-threaded on a single core, or we can distribute them leveraging Kubernetes.

We don't need to rewrite that code base for Spark. However, if we are writing code specifically for Spark Executors, it will not be amenable to running it locally.

I would recommend understanding the use case better. Only if it fits your use case, then go for it. But it is a great tool.

Overall, I would rate Apache Spark an eight out of ten. 

We use Spark for machine learning applications, clustering, and segmentation of customers.

Apache provides a lot of good documentation compared to other solutions. 

The migration of data between different versions could be improved. 

I've been using this solution for four years. 

The solution is stable. 

The solution is scalable. 

If you pay for customer support then you get a quick and efficient response, otherwise the community support offers good help. 

The initial setup has been simplified over the past few years and is now relatively straightforward. 

Licensing costs depend on where you source the solution. 

This is a good solution for big data use cases and I rate it eight out of 10. 

Apache Spark is a programming language similar to Java or Python. In my most recent deployment, we used Apache Spark to build engineering pipelines to move data from sources into the data lake.

One of Apache Spark's most valuable features is that it supports in-memory processing, the execution of jobs compared to traditional tools is very fast.

Apache Spark could improve the connectors that it supports. There are a lot of open-source databases in the market. For example, cloud databases, such as Redshift, Snowflake, and Synapse. Apache Spark should have connectors present to connect to these databases. There are a lot of workarounds required to connect to those databases, but it should have inbuilt connectors.

I have been using Apache Spark for approximately five years.

Apache Spark is stable.

I have found Apache Spark to be scalable.

Apache Spark is open-source, there is no team that will give you dedicated support, but you can post your queries on the community forums, and usually, you will receive a good response. Since it's open-source, you depend on freelance developers to respond to you, you cannot put a time limit there, but the response, on average, is pretty good.

If Apache Spark is in the cloud, setting it up will require only minutes. If it's on Amazon, GCP, or Microsoft cloud, it'll take minutes to set everything up. However, if you are using the on-premise version, then it might take some time to set up the environment.

I rate Apache Spark an eight out of ten.

We are using it for big data. We are using a small part of it, which is related to using data.

It is useful for handling large amounts of data. It is very useful for scientific purposes.

There are some difficulties that we are working on. It is useful for scientific purposes, but for commercial use of big data, it gives some trouble.

They should improve the stability of the product. We use Spark Executors and Spark Drivers to link to our own environment, and they are not the most stable products. Its scalability is also an issue.

We are building our own queries on Spark, and it can be improved in terms of query handling.

In my company, it has been used for several years, but I have been using it for seven months.

It is not scalable. Scalability is one of the issues.

It is open source from my point of view. So, there is no support.

I would advise not using it if you don't have experienced users inside your organization. If you have to figure it all out on your own, then you shouldn't start with it.

Overall, I would rate it a six out of 10. For a commercial use case, it is a six out of 10. For scientific purposes, it is an eight out of 10.