Amazon EMR vs Infobright DB comparison

"The solution helps us manage huge volumes of data."

"It has a variety of options and support systems."

"The solution is scalable."

"The initial setup is pretty straightforward."

"The solution is pretty simple to set up."

"The security of the managed workflow and the managed services are the best features for us. Since we inherited their security model and it's all managed services, those are the key benefits for our clients."

"One of the valuable features about this solution is that it's managed services, so it's pretty stable, and scalable as much as you wish. It has all the necessary distributions. With some additional work, it's also possible to change to a Spark version with the latest version of EMR. It also has Hudi, so we are leveraging Apache Hudi on EMR for change data capture, so then it comes out-of-the-box in EMR."

"The project management is very streamlined."

"It has very amazing smart grid query feature for very fast aggregate queries across millions of rows"

"Amazon EMR can improve by adding some features, such as megastore services and HiveServer2. Additionally, the user interface could be better, similar to what Apache service provides, cross-platform services."

"The problem for us is it starts very slow."

"There is room for improvement with respect to retries, handling the volume of data on S3 buckets, cluster provisioning, scaling, termination, security, and integration between services like S3, Glue, Lake Formation, and DynamoDB."

"As people are shifting from legacy solutions to other technologies, Amazon EMR needs to add more features that give more flexibility in managing user data."

"There is no need to pay extra for third-party software."

"Modules and strategies should be better handled and notified early in advance."

"The product's features for storing data in static clusters could be better."

"Spark jobs take longer on Amazon EMR compared to previous experiences."

"Only the data from the columns that reached 2GB will actually decrease. Other columns below 2GB in size do not leave the disk."

"You don't need to pay for licensing on a yearly or monthly basis, you only pay for what you use, in terms of underlying instances."

"There is no need to pay extra for third-party software."

"Amazon EMR is not very expensive."

"Amazon EMR's price is reasonable."

"The price of the solution is expensive."

"The product is not cheap, but it is not expensive."

"I rate the tool's pricing a five out of ten. It can be expensive since it's a managed service, and if you are not careful, you can run into unexpected charges. You can make a mistake that costs you tens of thousands of dollars. That's happened to us twice, so I'm sensitive to it. We're still trying to work on that. Our smallest client probably spends a hundred thousand dollars yearly on licensing, while our largest is well over a million."

"The cost of Amazon EMR is very high."

"Our pricing was based on server instances and it was actually very cheap compared to Oracle. I guess you get what you pay for."