Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Amazon EC2 Auto Scaling vs Apache NiFi comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

Amazon EC2 Auto Scaling
Ranking in Compute Service
2nd
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
8.2
Number of Reviews
44
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Apache NiFi
Ranking in Compute Service
8th
Average Rating
7.8
Number of Reviews
11
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2025, in the Compute Service category, the mindshare of Amazon EC2 Auto Scaling is 11.8%, up from 11.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Apache NiFi is 7.7%, up from 6.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Compute Service
 

Featured Reviews

Erick  Karanja - PeerSpot reviewer
Scaling is as easy as hitting a button and setup is straightforward
AWS has already made improvements. In the past, if you provisioned a large EC2 instance and underutilized it, you still paid a premium. Now, AWS encourages using Kubernetes, where you primarily pay for the compute power you actually use in production. There is room for improvement. You might end up paying a high price if you're not careful and you provision a server that's underutilized. AWS has left it to engineers to figure out solutions. If you find the cost too high, you can move to Kubernetes, which might be a better solution for you than large EC2 instances. So, the improvements need to come from the user side, not the provider. Software engineers and engineering teams need to know their limits with EC2 instances. They need to recognize when it's time to transition their applications to Kubernetes. This means building with the cloud in mind from the start, making it easier to move solutions to the cloud without suffering upgrades and integration issues.
Arjun Pandey - PeerSpot reviewer
Good monitoring, metrics capabilities and provides ability to design processors with a single click
The good thing about Apache NiFi is that it has a concept called a flow file, and there's something called a flow file processor. The processor is the building block of your entire job. They have close to 500 processors for each purpose. For example, for reading from Kafka, Ni-Fi has a processor called "consumer Kafka". To write to S3, they have a processor called "put S3". Now, if I read from Kafka and write my own application, I'd need to ensure the library I'm using tracks my messages. I'd also need to handle any failures by rereading messages and ensuring acknowledgment. But all this complexity is already handled by Apache processor. They have around 500 processors, with a community investing significant effort into developing them. I can design your processor with a single click, export the entire workflow, and import it. The format is actionable, so NiFi is immediately set up. It's also distributed in nature so that I can scale it across nodes based on the workload. These nodes share their state. If one node goes down during processing, that data might be lost, but any subsequent data is safe. Such occurrences are rare. In essence, if you want a quick solution, Apache NiFi is a strong contender. There are other solutions like AirFlow and some paid pipeline options. AirFlow is open-source but can be complicated. For ETL or ERT solutions, there are pricier options. But if I need a pipeline that I can monitor step by step, Apache NiFi is a good choice. It integrates with Prometheus metrics, allowing me to embed them in my workflow. There's also a processor for integration with Slack, and I can receive notifications when the workflow is completed or fails. Another feature I appreciate is "back pressure," which NiFi handles automatically. It maintains its own queue and addresses back-pressure issues. If, for instance, an upstream entity isn't fast enough, items get stored in a queue, managed internally by NiFi's back pressure algorithm.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"The initial setup of Amazon EC2 Auto Scaling is easy...Since we are an enterprise-sized company and a client of Amazon, the response from the technical support team was immediate."
"Service for launching or terminating Amazon EC2 instances, with good scalability and stability."
"The most valuable feature of Amazon EC2 Auto Scaling is scaling your intra based on the request. Additionally, you are able to map the solution with any load balancer, such as public or private load balancers."
"The tool is a simple solution. You can deploy a new virtual machine in minutes. You can select options like memory and core number and connect storage. It's great because it's simple and fast. You can build a virtual machine in minutes, do your experiments, and then uninstall it without paying for it when it's not in use."
"Amazon EC2 Auto Scaling has good integration."
"The integration capabilities are good."
"It has the best auto-scaling features."
"The support from Amazon EC2 Auto Scaling is very good."
"Visually, this is a good product."
"The most valuable feature has been the range of clients and the range of connectors that we could use."
"The initial setup is very easy."
"It's an automated flow, where you can build a flow from source to destination, then do the transformation in between."
"The initial setup is very easy. I would rate my experience with the initial setup a ten out of ten, where one point is difficult, and ten points are easy."
"The most valuable features of this solution are ease of use and implementation."
"The user interface is good and makes it easy to design very popular workflows."
"We can integrate the tool with other applications easily."
 

Cons

"Scalability can be improved."
"It should work for the cloud, cloud monitoring features, and DevOps processes. It should automatically enable features for downscaling and upscaling."
"There is a need for improvement in understanding the pricing structure, as it is complex and depends on several factors such as the location of data centers."
"The solution's pricing is expensive. You pay based on how much you use it, like paying for the time or hours you use the service. There's no need to buy hardware separately."
"Amazon EC2 Auto Scaling can provide more discounts when using the machines the solution uses."
"I would like to see a feature included that has the capability to clone when an instance is being terminated."
"It's an expensive solution."
"The technical support needs to be improved."
"The overall stability of this solution could be improved. In a future release, we would like to have access to more features that could be used in a parallel way. This would provide more freedom with processing."
"More features must be added to the product."
"The tool should incorporate more tutorials for advanced use cases. It has tutorials for simple use cases."
"There should be a better way to integrate a development environment with local tools."
"We run many jobs, and there are already large tables. When we do not control NiFi on time, all reports fail for the day. So it's pretty slow to control, and it has to be improved."
"The use case templates could be more precise to typical business needs."
"There are some claims that NiFi is cloud-native but we have tested it, and it's not."
"I think the UI interface needs to be more user-friendly."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The pricing is not fixed and it is based on usage."
"The product is cheap."
"Its price is affordable for enterprise customers."
"The solution is less expensive than a few competitors."
"The tool's pricing is good and not expensive."
"The solution's licensing is based on a pay-as-you-go model. You only pay for the resources you use, whether it's RAM, processing power, or storage. So, it's calculated based on the time you use those resources, typically billed in hours or minutes."
"There is no specific pricing for Amazon EC2 Auto Scaling, but we have to pay for the number of machines getting scaled up."
"I rate Amazon EC2 Auto Scaling's pricing a seven out of ten."
"It's an open-source solution."
"I used the tool's free version."
"We use the free version of Apache NiFi."
"The solution is open-source."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Compute Service solutions are best for your needs.
831,071 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
22%
Computer Software Company
16%
University
8%
Government
7%
Financial Services Firm
18%
Computer Software Company
14%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Retailer
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Amazon EC2 Auto Scaling?
The solution removes the need for hardware. We can easily create servers or machines. Just by clicking or specifying our requirements, like memory size or disk space, it's set up for us. The tool e...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Amazon EC2 Auto Scaling?
The pricing structure from AWS is really complex and depends on factors like the region and specific services used. Prices can vary significantly even within the same service across different locat...
What needs improvement with Amazon EC2 Auto Scaling?
There is a need for improvement in understanding the pricing structure, as it is complex and depends on several factors such as the location of data centers.
What needs improvement with Apache NiFi?
The tool should incorporate more tutorials for advanced use cases. It has tutorials for simple use cases.
 

Also Known As

AWS RAM
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Expedia, Intuit, Royal Dutch Shell, Brooks Brothers
Macquarie Telecom Group, Dovestech, Slovak Telekom, Looker, Hastings Group
Find out what your peers are saying about Amazon EC2 Auto Scaling vs. Apache NiFi and other solutions. Updated: December 2024.
831,071 professionals have used our research since 2012.