Databricks Reviews

Databricks is used for transformations and streaming data processing. We utilize it primarily for data analytics, including the use of Delta Lake and Delta Life tables for ETL processes, dashboards for analysis, and the Unity catalog for role management.

Databricks improves our data analysis tasks with its powerful functionality, offering real-time analytics and machine learning features that help improve model accuracy. It is easy to use, which helps in saving time and, ultimately, costs.

The most valuable features of Databricks include the Delta Lake, a user-friendly interface, Delta Life tables for ETL, dashboard features for analysis, and the Unity catalog for role management. It also offers AI functionalities that assist with code management and machine learning processes.

While Databricks is generally a robust solution, I have noticed a limitation with debugging in the Delta Live Table, which could be improved. The issue with Delta type tables not loading into multiple places in a single pipeline has been fixed recently.

I have been working with Databricks for four years.

We regularly contact Databricks support and are satisfied with their service. I would rate them eight out of ten.

Positive

The initial setup was straightforward after the first week. Deployment processes became quick and efficient using Git.

In terms of cost-effectiveness, Databricks is worth the money.

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten.

We're using it to provide a unified development experience for all our data experts, including all data engineers, data scientists, and IT engineers. With the Databrick Platform we allows teams to collaborate easily towards building Data Science models for our clients. The development environment allows us to ingest data from various data sources, scale the data processing and expose them either trough API or through enriched datasets made available to web app or dashboard leveraging the serverless capacities of SQL warehouse endpoints.

Databricks allowed us to offer an homogeneous development environment accross different accounts and domains, and also across different clouds. The upskilling of our employees is far more linear and faster, while removing the complexity of infrastructure management. This lead to an increased collaboration between domain thanks to a better onboarding experience, more performant pipelines and a smoother industrialization process. Overall client satisfaction has increased and the time to first insight has been reduced.

The shared experience of collaborative notebooks is probably the most useful aspect since, as an expert, it allows me to help my juniors debug their books and their code live. I can do some live coding with them or help them find the errors very efficiently.

It has become very simple to set up thanks to its official Terraform provider and the open-source modules made available on GitHub.

I love Databricks due to the fact that we can now deploy it in 15 minutes and it's ready to use. That's very nice since we often help our clients in deploying their first Data Platform with Databricks.

The solution is stable, with LTS Runtimes that have proven to remain stable over the years. 

I would love to be able to declare my workflows as-code, in an Airflow-like way. This would help creating more robust ingestion python modules we can test, share and update within the company. 

We would also love to have access to cluster metrics in a programmatic way, so that we can analyse hardware logs and identify potential bottlenecks to optimize.

Lastly, the latest VS Code extension has proven to be useful and appreciated by the community, as it allows to develop locally and benefits from traditional software best-practices tools like pre-commits for example.

I've been using the solution for more than four years now, in the context of PoC to full end-to-end Data Platform deployment.

The product is very stable. I've been using it for three years now, and I have projects that have been running for three years without any big issues.

It's very scalable. I have a project that started as a proof of concept on connected cars. We had 100 cars to track at first - just for the proof of concept. Now we have millions of cars that are being tracked. It scales very well. We have terabytes of data every day and it doesn't even flinch.

I've had very good experiences with technical support where they answer me in a couple of hours. Sometimes it takes a bit longer. It's usually a matter of days, so it's very good overall. 

Even if it took a bit of time, I got my answer. They never left me without an answer or a solution.

Positive

The implementation is very simple to set up. That's why we choose it over many other tools. Its Terraform provider is our way-to-go for the initial setup has we are reusing templates to get a functional workspace in minutes.

Usually, we have two to five data engineers handling the maintenance and running of our solutions.

We deploy it in-house.

The solution is a bit expensive. That said, it's worth it. I see it as an Apple product. For example, the iPhone is very expensive, yet you get what you pay for.

The cost depends on the size of your data. If you have lots of data, it's going to be more expensive since your paper compute units will be more. My smallest project is around a hundred euros, and my most expensive is just under a thousand euros a week. That is based on terabytes of data processed each month.

We looked into Azure Synapse as an alternative, as well as Azure ML and Vertex on GCP. Vertex AI would be the main alternative.

Some people consider Snowflake a competitor; however, we can't deploy Snowflake ourselves just like we deploy Databricks ourselves. We use that as an advantage when we sell Databricks to our clients. We say, "If you go with us, we are going to deploy Databricks in your environment in 15 minutes," and they really like it.

Lately Fabric was released and can offer quite a similar product as Databricks. Yet, the user experience, the CI/CD capabilities and the frequent release cycle of Databricks remains a strong advantage.

We're a partner.

We use the solution on various clouds. Mostly it is Aure. However, we also have Google and AWS as well. 

One of the big advantages is that it works across domains. I'm responsible for a data engineering team. However, I work on the same platform with data scientists, and I'm very close to my IT team, who is in charge of the data access and data access control, and they can manage all the accesses from one point to all the data assets. It's very useful for me as a data engineer. I'm sure that my IT director would say it's very useful for him too. They managed to build a solution that can very easily cross responsibilities. It unifies all the challenges in one place and solves them all mostly.

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten.

Our company uses the solution's Spark module for big data analytics as a  processing engine.  

We do not use the module as a streaming engine. The historic perception is that Spark is for batches, machine learning, analytics, and big data processing but not for streaming and that is exactly how we use it. 

The solution's features are fantastic and include interactive clusters that perform at top speed when compared to other solutions.

The ATC monitoring experience and the maturity of the APIs are very good. 

CI/CD needs additional leverage and support. Community forums are helpful for gaining knowledge but the solution should provide specific documentation.

Streaming services such as Flink should be amplified and better supported. 

There are not many connectors to MapReduce.

I have been using the solution for seven years. 

The solution is mature and stable compared to other products. 

The solution is scalable with no issues from a computer perspective.

I received support for initial challenges and it was very good. The support team was very professional and provided the answers I needed. 

I rate support an eight out of ten. 

Positive

I previously used Cloud-Bricks. 

The initial setup is easy for me because I access the solution on a web browser. 

Unilever had a specific team for implementing and managing the solution.

Walmart had a team of ten engineers for implementation and a couple of engineers for management. 

We receive an ROI for our batch constructs. 

The solution is a good value for batch processing and huge workloads. 

The price might be high for use cases that are for streaming or strictly data science. 

I have evaluated multiple options including Cloud-Brick and Dataproc for price versus performance, technical support, and CI/CD approach.

I started as a consumer and used the solution for on-premises deployment with Unilever from a data science perspective. At that time, the solution was in its beta stage but viewed as good, far ahead of its competition, and expensive. The key comparison used to be HDInsight or Adobe Cluster for cloud data and the solution was thought of as a cluster service rather than for unified analytics.

I moved along on my journey to Walmart where I was building their platform and compared it to the solution from a cloud perspective and a cluster service with notebooks. Consumers at the time were using Project Lightspeed and ATC for streaming. Spark was used as a micro-batching engine for machine learning, analytics, and big data processing. At some point, the solution became preferred and more than 100 staff members were leveraging its use.

I found that the solution had interesting features that I liked such as its notebook, interactive clusters with fast speed, and the ATC monitoring experience. I did not like the solution from a CI/CD perspective because it had a rigidity in terms of the approval process.

The solution grew from that original space and, by the time I had moved to Microsoft, was partnered with Microsoft Azure. An integration with ADF and other products solved the CI/CD issues for me.

I am now leading streaming platforms for Walmart so my interest is in the solution's streaming capabilities. I began building a streaming platform using Spark PM in Microsoft so the solution was its key competitor. Then the solution launched a vectorized machine on Photon for the Spark engine. Its performance was a key factor in moving from Microsoft because it performed much better than other products including opensource Spark, Microsoft Synapse Spark, and Dataproc.

It is important to do POCs and run tests to control the meter that also controls the price. The meter can go really high from a computing perspective if POCs and settings are not streamlined. 

I rate the solution an eight out of ten. 

Our company uses the solution for series-based and panel-based migrations. We collect and store user requirements, use apps to fetch data, and provide customers with better data for business reports. There are 30 to 40 users in our company.

The solution is an impressive tool for data migration and integration. 

The run time is very quick.

The solution has some scalability and integration limitations when consolidating legacy systems.

I have been using the solution for two years. 

The solution is stable. 

It is not really scalability but more about the combination of the structure, consolidation, and different formats we can split and merge. We do a lot of things while storing the target operational model. Snowflake is more flexible and scalable in that regard. 

We have contacted technical support a lot about replicating values in PDF files. So far, they have not been able to provide a viable solution. 

The setup is of average difficulty but tougher than Snowflake. 

Deployment is easy and run time is quick. 

We implemented the solution in-house.

One resource manages services for end-to-end monitoring and maintenance activities. 

The solution is based on a licensing model. Updates occur automatically by the task base. 

Snowflake is quite impressive in comparison to the solution because there is flexibility in the way you consolidate. In contrast, the solution has some scalability and integration limitations when consolidating legacy systems. Tool wise, Snowflake is easy from the technical perspective because connectors are included.  

We are evaluating options for one particular use case. The customer wants to replicate values from PDFs and enter them in the data model. We contacted the solution's technical support but do not yet have a viable answer. There are gaps in what we do and how we capture. The only option right now is for the customer to manually upload values that we integrate using Synapse to consolidate report data. We haven't yet found another tool that maps to meet our customer's requirement. 

I rate the solution a seven out of ten. 

My company uses Databricks to process real-time and batch data with its streaming analytics part. We use Databricks' Unified Data Analytics Platform, for which we have Azure as a solution to bring the unified architecture on top of that to handle the streaming load for our platform.

The most valuable feature of the solution stems from the fact that it is quite fast, especially regarding features like its computation and atomicity parts of reading data on any solution. We have a storage account, and we can read the data on the go and use that since we now have the unity catalog in Databricks, which is quite good for giving you an insight into the metadata of the data you're going to process. There are a lot of things that are quite nice with Databricks.

Scalability is an area with certain shortcomings. The solution's scalability needs improvement.

I have been using Databricks for a few years. I use the solution's latest version. Though currently my company is a user of the solution, we are planning to enter into a partnership with Databricks.

It is a stable solution. Stability-wise, I rate the solution an eight to nine out of ten.

It is a scalable solution. Scalability-wise, I rate the solution an eight to nine out of ten.

My company has a team of 50 to 60 people who use the solution.

Sometimes, my company does need support from the technical team of Databricks. The technical team of Databricks has been good and helpful. I rate the technical support an eight out of ten.

Positive

The initial setup phase of Databricks was good. You can spin up clusters and integrate those with DevOps as well. Databricks it's quite nice owing to its user-friendly UI, DPP, and workspaces.

The solution is deployed on the cloud.

The time taken for the deployment depends on the workload.

I cannot judge whether the product is expensive or cheap since I am unaware of the prices of the other products, which are competitors of Databricks. The licensing costs of Databricks depend on how many licenses we need, depending on which Databricks provides a lot of discounts.

It is a state-of-the-art product revolutionizing data analytics and machine learning workspaces. Databricks are a complete solution when it comes to working with data.

I rate the overall product an eight out of ten.

I work in a project where I build data pipelines using Azure Data Factory. I ingest data from on-premises to Azure Data Lake. After that, I perform transformations using Databricks notebooks and Spark, building the Databricks bronze, silver, and gold layers. We export reports from the gold layer.

Recently, we started using Databricks in our organization. It helps integrate data science and machine learning capabilities.

The Unity Catalog is a central governance for all data around the workspaces, and also Databricks' integration capabilities with cloud services like Azure Event Hub and Azure Data Factory. It is user-friendly for data processing, and Spark is a strong language for big data processing.

Performance could be improved. It is crucial to check coding, configure Spark correctly, implement caching, and monitor performance metrics to enhance performance.

I have used Databricks for over two years.

I would rate stability as eight out of ten. It is quite stable.

Databricks is perfect for scalability. It is easy to scale clusters.

I haven't faced any issues requiring customer support, so I don't have experience with their customer support.

Positive

We used Informatica before, which is perfect for data management solutions. We started using Databricks for its capabilities in data science and machine learning.

I would rate the initial setup as nine out of ten. It is quite easy for someone experienced with Spark.

For my company, it's okay to upgrade to Databricks because it's comparable in price to Informatica. It is not considered expensive for the company.

For machine learning, I used Python and its libraries manually. Prior to Databricks, there was no special tool used for these purposes.

If a company focuses on data science and machine learning, I recommend using Databricks. It's a great solution in this field. For data management needs, Informatica is advantageous due to its comprehensive tools.

I am a Databricks service partner, and my customers use Azure Databricks and Data Factory.

It's very simple to use Databricks Apache Spark. It's really good for parallel execution to scale up the workload. In this context, the usage is more about virtual machines.

Using meta-stores like Hive was optional, and the solution is good for data science use cases. With the Authenticator Log, Databricks is good for data transformation and BI usage. We have a platform.

I would like more integration with SQL for using data in different workspaces. We use the user interface for some functionalities, while for others, we have to use SQL to create data sets and grant permissions. For example, when creating a cluster, we have to create it with some API or user interface. Creating a cluster with some properties using SQL grants the possibility of using SQL syntax. Integration with SQL will make Databricks easier to use by people who have experience with databases like Lakehouse, and they would be able to use the data lake and BI. More integration will help have one point of view for everyone using SQL syntax.

Integration with Kubernetes could also be good for minimizing the price because you can use Kubernetes instead of virtual machines. But that won't be easy.

I have worked with the solution for four or five years, with some experience since 2016.

The solution is stable. The only problem with stability would be that people are not using it efficiently.

The solution is good for scalability.

When we have administration experience, the solution is not difficult to deploy. Technically, however, it's difficult because governance is more complex. For example, I have two warehouses on Databricks, which are clusters in this workspace, and we have to switch from workspace to workspace to have all this information. There is a system table that has all this, but I don't know if everyone can use these tables.

Databricks are not costly when compared with other solutions' prices.

Databricks's functionalities are as good as solutions like Snowflake, BigQuery, and Redshift.

People sometimes do not use the solution efficiently. They misunderstand databases, the usage of tables, and the performance. Many data engineers are very junior and don't have skills in that. Stability is more a customer problem than a problem with the product itself. One possible problem with the product is that there's no method to pause the usage of something. For example, we have to use the meta server or the data catalog in Synapse. But in Databricks, we have a choice to use a catalog or not, or Hive, which is always integrated, but we have to choose whether to use it or not. Many customers directly use the passes on Databricks, which causes performance and governance problems.

I can offer a lot of advice on Databricks, and one is to use meta stores like Unity Catalog or Hive Metastore. For incoming use cases, it's better to use Unity Catalog.

I rate Databricks a nine out of ten.

I worked with Databricks pretty recently. The particular design processes involved in Databricks were also a part of that specific design/architectural process.

We have used the solution for the overall data foundation ecosystem for processing and storage on a Delta format. We have also seen use cases where we were trying to establish advanced analytics models and data sharing where we leverage the Delta Sharing capabilities from Databricks.

A very valuable feature is the data processing, and the solution is specifically good at using the Spark ecosystem.

There are some aspects of Databricks, like generative AI, where they are positioning things like DALL-E. They're a little bit late to the game, but I think there are some things that they are working on. Generative AI is catching up in areas like data governance and enterprise flavor. Hence, these are places where Databricks has to be faster, and even though they are fast, I'm not sure how they'll catch up and get adopted because there are strong players in the market.

Databricks is coming up with a few good things in terms of integration. But I have to put one point forward that covers multiple aspects, which is the ease of use for the end user while operating this particular tool. For example, a tool like ADS gives you a GUI-based development, which is good for the end user who does development or maintenance. Looking at the complexities of data integration, a GUI might not be easy, but Databricks should embrace something on the graphical user development front because it is currently notebook-driven. Also, in terms of accessing the data for the end user, Databricks has an SQL interface, similar to earlier tools like SQL Management Studio. Since people are mostly comfortable with SSMS already or not, Databricks can build integration to known tools for data access, and that also helps, apart from what they're doing. I would like to see improvements with respect to user enablement, which is a good part of enterprise strategy. I would like to see their integration with a broader ecosystem of products. If you have to do data governance in tools like Microsoft Purview, it's manual and difficult. Now, I'm unsure if that momentum must be from Databricks or Microsoft. But it would be good if Databricks had some open interfaces to share metadata, which could be viewed in tools enabling data governance like Collibra, Purview, or Informatica. The improvement has to do with user and metadata integration for tools.

I've worked with Databricks for over five or six years, but it's been on and off.

The solution is scalable. In this particular ecosystem, there is no one else who can catch up with Databricks for now.

Databricks' customer support is very good. They have a lot of ways in which they interact with vendors and service partners across the globe. They have periodic touch-up sessions with vendors, where their engineers answer your questions.

The implementation is not challenging because the solution integrates well with the platforms on which they are established, whether it's Azure, AWS, or GCP. The solution is not difficult to set up, but you'd probably need a technical user to operate it.

It's the same story with maintenance, where you'd need a technically proficient person with programming knowledge to maintain it.

Databricks integrates many enterprise processes because data processing and AIML are a small part of a larger ecosystem. Databricks has been a part of other platforms, and they are trying to establish their platform, which is a good direction.

Most of the capabilities of the underlying platform can be leveraged there. But the setup isn't difficult if the database lacks some capability, you can't find it in the database, or you're not comfortable with a certain feature in the database. It integrates well with the underlying platform. For example, with scheduling, let's say you are uncomfortable with workflow management. You can utilize integrations with EDA for any other tool and probably perform scheduling. Even if what you're trying to do is not easy, it is enabled with integration. Either they build a required feature in their tool later on, like a GUI, or you perform integrations to make the features possible.

We did evaluate licensing costs, but it had more to do with the Azure ecosystem pricing since whatever we are doing has more to do with Azure Databricks. Many optimizations are recommended, but we haven't exercised those for now. But considering that the processing is a bit more efficient, the overall price won't be much different from what it could be for any other similar component or technology. We haven't had specific discussions with Databricks' folks on pricing.

My advice to users who would like to start working with Databricks is that it is a good solution to work with for data integration and machine learning. Databricks is maturing for other use cases, so there are two points to be considered. One is that you need to evaluate how they will mature, which will be on a case-to-case basis. Second, how will it align with the overall platform story? There will be many overlapping aspects over there as Databricks expands its capabilities. In that case, it must be considered that if those capabilities overlap, how will the underlying platform vendors handle it? How would that interplay happen if many of Databricks' new capabilities align with Microsoft Fabric? That has to be very carefully considered. Otherwise, if you utilize those new capabilities, there might be a discontinuity where you cannot use Databricks because the platform does not support that.

If I specifically talk about Spark-based processing transformations, the data integration story, and advanced stability, I would rate Databricks around eight out of ten. However, with respect to new capabilities like cataloging, data governance, and security integration, I rate Databricks around five because it has to establish these features. And since Databricks integrates with platforms, we must see the interplay with the platforms' capabilities.

I overall rate Databricks a seven out of ten.