AWS Glue Reviews

We are implementing a solution in AWS for one of our customers. It is more of a data analytics solution. We wanted to process data from different sources and put it into a central repository that can be used for any analysis or predictive modeling.

The most valuable feature of AWS Glue is scalability.

Since AWS Glue is not like an enterprise ETL tool, we need to put quite a lot of effort into customization. The solution has a visual editor, but most ETL transformations cannot be implemented or constructed using that. We always have to do a script. The solution's visual ETL tool is of no use for actual implementation.

I have been using AWS Glue for two years.

I rate AWS Glue an eight out of ten for stability.

Most of our clients for AWS Glue are enterprise businesses.

I rate AWS Glue ten out of ten for scalability.

Nobody from AWS technical support has implementation experience.

Neutral

On a scale from one to ten, where one is difficult and ten is easy, I rate the solution's configuration a five and its implementation a two or three out of ten.

The solution's pricing is pay-as-you-go. If you are using the solution for an enterprise business, it will be expensive.

AWS Glue is a cloud-based solution.

Overall, I rate AWS Glue a six out of ten.

Currently, we are utilizing AWS Glue for various ETL workloads, specifically in the life sciences domain. Our primary objective is to acquire data from various sources. Then, we store it in Redshift. This is where the complete use case of AWS Glue comes into the picture.

The solution is highly user-friendly, and its features are easy to use. The new addition of AWS Glue Data Catalog is also very beneficial, making the tool even more helpful for its users.

The solution could be cheaper. The price of the solution is an area that needs improvement.

I have been using AWS Glue in my organization for a year. I am an end-user and a customer of the solution.

It is a stable solution. We have not faced any issues in the past year, so it's pretty stable. Stability-wise, I rate it a ten out of ten.

The solution has proven to be scalable, and from my experience in the data engineering domain, I rate it an eight out of ten. It is worth noting that I may not be the most qualified person to provide a rating since I mostly manage and work on data-related tasks. Currently, approximately 20-25 people in our company use the solution.

I had no experience with the technical support team of AWS Glue.

Previously, I used Azure Data Factory. But I did not find it really helpful. And it was a bit complex. It was not that user-friendly. And I am much more comfortable with the AWS services as compared to Azure services.

The initial setup of the solution is straightforward, and I find it easy to implement. I rate the setup process a nine on a scale of one to ten, where ten is the easiest. As for the deployment process, we usually request our platform team to handle it, and they are quite efficient in deploying and managing the infrastructure. Although I am not directly involved in the deployment process, my understanding is that it can be completed in just a few hours with the help of two to three team members. Our platform team consists of data engineers, architects, and platform engineers who cater to the needs of various projects and products within the AWS ecosystem. Fortunately, the solution does not require any maintenance.

Price-wise, the solution is adequate, and we have no issues with it. We believe that the cost is justified given the number of users and the features it provides. Overall, it can be considered an average-priced tool. I would rate the solution a six or seven on a scale of one to ten, with ten being very expensive. Specifically, I rate its pricing a six out of ten.

Before choosing AWS Glue, I evaluated Azure Data Factory.

I would tell those planning to use AWS Glue to try it. I rate the overall solution a ten out of ten.

Once you get the data and you don't know about the structure of the data, then Glue is very helpful to estimate the structure, including where is the structure, and it'll identify everything for you. It has one component that is called Glue Crawler that is quite useful for this task. It will go through segments of your data and try to guess their structure. It pops out the structure, and you can modify it according to your convenience.

It is good to basically perform the ETL when your files are stored in the S3 bucket. Glue supports other external sources also. That said, most of the time, we have basically given our proposal to clients if the data is available in S3.

The solution helps organizations gain flexibility in defining the structure of the data.

You can define and then include the original data structure and decide what the required fills are or what other ones you can omit. You can perform certain processing tasks also, and you can basically apply the multiplying factor; you can do the cleanup, et cetera, on the fly with the Glue.

The Glue Crawler can have a set of connectors, so you can utilize those connectors to connect with the external databases, which may be on-premise in different networks or maybe locally on AWS. Basically, you can use the connector to fetch the data. 

Once you have a data schema, you can start streaming or fetching the data in the particular format conversion. For example, suppose you have the text file, and you have Word in place or maybe in SQL, and you can use the connector on the fly to convert the database.

For batch processing, batch genetics, it is helpful for the ETL process.

The setup is easy. 

The solution offers a free trial. 

The solution can scale. 

It's stable.

Users only pay for what they use once they have a license. 

I haven't looked into Glue in terms of seeking out flaws. I've not come across missing features. 

I've been dealing with the solution for two or three years. I have given a lot of proposals based on customer demand.

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

Typically, data analytics individuals use the solution. It's not for an entire organization.

It's a scalable solution. I'd rate it ten out of ten. 

We do have plans to increase usage. We are in the process of moving many things to the cloud, and if they move onto AWS, they'll need Glue.

I've never been in touch with technical support. I can't speak to how helpful or responsive they are. 

The solution is very straightforward to set up and implement. 

I'd rate the ease of deployment at an eight or nine out of ten. However, it all depends on the circumstances. 

The deployment only takes two to three minutes. It's very fast.

Using the console, you have different sections of AWS Glue You can go and specify the input data source and output target data place. Then you need to specify the transformation. If you want to do the filtering, et cetera, you have to specify. You have the blueprint of transformation functions available also, and you can select from there and then just run it. 

I've only just explored the solution. It has not been deployed yet. 

When you are just learning and testing the solution, it is free. I cannot speak to the full cost beyond that, as I am just experimenting with the product. They do offer it to users for a limited time to try for free, however.

My understanding is you only pay for what you use, so pricing would vary based on that. You don't need to maintain a cluster and it is serverless. 

There are no extra costs beyond a standard license fee.

We are using the latest version of the solution. The solution runs on the cloud and is serverless. 

It's a good solution to use when people are not exporting analytics. If you want to perform some ETL on your data and the data is complex, then you should go for Glue. It is easy to set up.

I'd rate the solution ten out of ten. 

Our company uses the solution for ETL data movement for our customers such as on-premises to cloud, cloud to cloud, and cloud to Snowflake. We also data catalog and schedule ETL jobs. We are able to monitor all jobs through AWS services. 

Transformations are valuable because you can modify or override complex data logic from an open source or Spark to solve issues. 

For example, it is easy to solve issues where volume is good but performance is degrading because you can split jobs into small chunks to more quickly handle data loads. 

The setup and installation is a bit complex without advanced knowledge or training. It would be easier for an AWS expert or someone in DevOps.

Transformations need improvements to be more user friendly and rely less on coding like Matillion. 

I have been using the solution for three years. 

The solution's stability is decent and rates higher than other products. It works well with Snowflake, Azure, GCP, and AWS-supported products. 

A hybrid situation may cause delays in performance. 

The solution is scalable. 

One of our customers used technical support and found them to be helpful. 

The setup and installation is a bit complex. Training or advance knowledge is required. Someone with AWS experience or a DevOps perspective would have fewer issues. 

We install the solution for customers and the timeline depends on the job. 

A complete project will take a few days to a week for deployment. The number of jobs and components determines how many technicians are required for setup, installation, and deployment. Technician requirements can range from two to fifteen. 

Deployment will take a couple of hours for a few announcement jobs that deploy from the CI/CD pipeline.

The solution is my second choice because I prefer Snowflake's capabilities. 

We are primarily using it for batch crossing and transformations.

We have a large set of data and we are doing some transformations and identification. We are cleaning the data and transformations. Then we are putting the data into the destination table. So it is very comfortable.

The most valuable features currently are glue studio, jobs, and triggers.

I would like to see stable libraries at the moment they are not there.

I have been using AWS Glue for the past five years.

The stability I would consider to be an extensible Apache Spark.

The scalability is good and we have three hundred projects we are working with.

Previously, we used EMR, Informatica, Data Pipeline, and Azure Data Factory.

The initial setup is straightforward.

We did our deployment in-house with the CI/CD integrations like GitHub and deployed the code on Glue. 

We are seeing a very good return on our investment.

The current cost is around forty to fifty thousand a month.

I would definitely recommend using AWS Glue for batching procedures. I would rate AWS Glue an eight out of ten.

Our company is creating data warehousing in the cloud. Our team includes four data engineers, two data ops, and two data administrators. 

We use S3 to data lake or prepare data from two databases that are contained in MySQL and Oracle. For the migration, we use DMS.

Then, we use the solution to perform data transformation. For Oracle, we use Data Catalog and Data Crawler to create our catalog. Dev Endpoint is used to develop complex data transformations. We then migrate to Studio Notebook where we develop and schedule a complex Spark job. 

Finally, we load the transformed data to Redshift so our data analyst team can visualize it with QuickSight. 

The solution is serverless so it allows us to transform data while optimizing the cost and performance of Spark jobs. 

The solution works with many data sources and services in the cloud. 

Glue Watch monitors our Spark jobs and immediately alerts us to issues so we are able to resolve them quickly. 

The solution does not work with Spark DataFrame. We can use the solution's DynamicFrame for this function but transformations are expensive. 

Not enough resources or services are available to run managed Spark jobs within the solution. We have reached out to Amazon many times regarding this issue. 

The solution should offer features for streaming data in addition to batching data. We can use other products such as Scala or Python but prefer the features be available in the solution. 

I have been using the solution for one year. 

The solution is stable with no issues. 

The solution is scalable. 

Technical support has been good and has handled any issues. 

I rate technical support an eight out of ten. 

Positive

The solution is the best service in its category at this time. Based on project budget and use case, we use either the solution or EMR.

EMR is used for projects that require the latest version of Spark. 

We use the solution for any other versions of Spark. 

I was not involved in the initial setup.

The solution's pricing is based on DPUs so it is a good idea to optimize use or it can get expensive. 

I use Studio Notebook because it is less expensive and jobs can be deleted or clustered to run in one day. 

I rate pricing a four out of ten. 

Our company only uses Amazon cloud because other cloud environments do not offer the same features. 

The solution's Studio uses GCP which is easier than coding in Python Spark or Scala Spark. 

Azure Data Factory's features do not compare to what the solution can do in the cloud. 

The solution is good for teams who do not want to worry about DevOps or who want to optimize cost by using the cloud. 

I rate the solution a seven out of ten. 

We are using AWS Glue for transforming firewalls synced to the Data Lake in the bronze zone. The ATL uses the solution to transform fields in the silver layer and later we will produce the gold zone. We are using the Delta Lake Architecture.

The most valuable feature of AWS Glue is its ease of use and good documentation. Additionally, we can do all the transformations that we need.

The price of the solution could improve.

I have been using AWS Glue for approximately one month.

The stability of AWS Glue is good.

AWS Glue is highly scalable.

There are dozens of customers using this solution.

I have not used the support from AWS Glue but I know their support is good.

I have previously used Azure and Spark for testing.

The initial setup of AWS Glue is simple. In other solutions, such as Spark, the configuration would take a lot longer.

I did the deployment of AWS Glue myself with the AMS console. I am a data engineer.

The overall cost of AWS Glue could be better. It cost approximately $1,000 a month. There is paid support available from AWS Glue.

If the cost of AWS Glue was 50 percent less then we would not move to another solution.

I am moving to the EMR serverless or GCP solution.

I rate AWS Glue a nine out of ten.

We are using it for day-to-day ETL jobs. It is being used to transfer data from Teradata to the cloud.

We are using its latest version.

It is AWS-integrated. There is end-to-end integration with the other AWS services. It is also user-friendly.

There should be more connectors for different databases.

I have been using this solution for almost a year.

It is stable.

It is scalable. We have almost 40 users.

Their support is very good. I would rate them a five out of five.

Positive

We were not using any other solution previously.

It was straightforward. Within a couple of hours, it was done.

Before you start using it, you need to know PySpark.

I would rate it a nine out of ten. It is good for what we are using it for.