Informatica Intelligent Data Management Cloud (IDMC) Reviews

We use MDM to get more data quality. We are partners with Informatica and I'm a senior technical lead and practice architect.

The fuzzy matching capability is a great feature as is the network hierarchy which is the new concept code. 

I think the UI could be improved. We're also currently facing issues with real-time integration and if Informatica had their own it would be helpful. They need to look into the user mechanism and the security access mechanism in the data governance process. One of the major features is access control and access data management and they need to work on that because I have observed some data glitches.

I've been using this solution for six years. 

The solution is stable.  

The solution is scalable. There is room for improvement in terms of scalability with the MDM SaaS. With limited data it's fine, but with a large volume the scalability is questionable, the threshold of data transaction is different. We are a service-based company, so there are limited users within the company. From the customer side, there are multiple users. 

We sometimes have technical issues and the customer support responds in a timely manner and is quite good.

The initial setup is easy. Deployment takes around 15 minutes and we have 22 internal users in our company. 

We pay an annual license. Mobile players are unable to afford the product. Different MDMs have different pricing approaches but there needs to be room for mobile players.

We went with Informatica because we have functional and non-functional requirements with respect to the market data management of our customers and Informatica is a suitable product for their needs.

This is a good solution although it's expensive and even though we are integrated with Oracle DB2, we're unable to integrate with multiple things. The market is changing and there are many more options so we have to think about the integrations of multiple databases. 

There are some additions or improvements that could be made so I rate this solution eight out of 10. 

The improved interface (IDD), eliminating the need to run a full tokenization process during match & merge process allowing 24x7 access to on-line users, and its better interface in console.

In the previous version, over 5,000 users of our on-line customer maintenance application were unable to use the application for approximately 12 hours every weekend while the match & merge function was run. Since upgrading, the overall time to execute M&M has decreased and the on-line users are able to add, update & search for customer records 24x7.

We experienced several basic issues with the product that required daily meetings with Informatica product specialists. Several Emergency Bug Fixes (EBFs) were required to fix the issues. It was felt that the vendors internal testing should have caught many of these issues and not been found by a customer.

I've used it for six years.

Deployment was very smooth due to extensive planning between the development and application support teams. A two week outage was planned and communicated. However the overall outage lasted only eight days. Running the Readiness scripts in production for several weeks before deployment, eliminated this step from the deployment process, and corrected data issues. Also, deployment activities ran faster in production environment than they did when performing upgrade steps in other environments (Dev, Val & POC).

Several issues were encountered in production that required immediate remediation that were not found during the 10 week QA cycle. After four weeks that system is stable and the operations team is able to complete daily & weekly cycles without issue.

There were very few changes to the database, and the same number of customers were being processed. A HealthCheck by Informatica was performed before starting the process to assure that the existing infrastructure was adequate for the new version.

Overall it's very good. Once a point person was assigned by Informatica, all the issues were consolidated into a single tracking spreadsheet that was reviewed daily. Tracking tickets were still submitted, but we did receive expert attention to resolve issues quickly.

Very good. Although, most technical support is off-shore, and there were issues with working time that prevented internal staff from interacting with off-shore experts.

No – just a long over due upgrade from 9.0.1 to 9.7.1.

The upgrade process is straightforward, and well documented. This process was executed multiple times as different environments were being built. By the time the production environment needed to be upgraded, it was almost standard. A separate Proof-of-Concept (POC) environment was developed to allow the developers to “play” with the new version and test functionality.

A combination of in-house and a vendor team. It was difficult to find anyone who had expertise with 9.7.1, so both teams learned during the project. The vendor team (Wipro) did have Informatica MDM experience in various version that allowed them to contribute to the design of the upgraded system.

We have a global license which was outside of the cost of the upgrade project.

No other options were evaluated.

The upgrade is straightforward if you currently have Informatica implemented. Don’t wait too long to upgrade, we waited five years between upgrades, and will not do so again. If this is you first MDM implementation, spend as much time forming data governance program as you do on the technical piece. The major vendors in the MDM space (Informatica, IBM, SAP & Oracle) have similar functionality. Informatica has been slowly integrating their legacy ETL product into the former Siperian product to make a very robust product.

Test data management is a common use case. When conducting testing in lower environments, we want to avoid exposing sensitive information. To achieve this, we use Data Masking to modify the data. 

For example, we change personally identifiable information, phone numbers, and emails so that they cannot be viewed. The modified data retains the structure and format but doesn't reveal the actual information.

The tool is mainly valuable for testing teams, as it helps protect sensitive data during testing. It can also be used to mask production data for different users, ensuring that only authorized individuals can access sensitive information. These are the main reasons why we use this tool.

I think there's only one area that could be improved. Currently, when we apply the Data Masking rate, we don't have a way to view the masked data. It would be helpful if there was a feature to allow us to see the actual information.

Once the data is masked, it cannot be reversed. Having the ability to revert it back to the actual value would be beneficial, especially if we need to see the original information. Although our enrollment has decreased, it would still be helpful to have that feature.

I have used Data Masking as part of my work.

Stability is good. It's definitely reliable.

Scalability is good. It's definitely scalable to handle higher volumes across different platforms as well. It performs well in terms of scalability. 

Additionally, when it comes to implementing more source systems, there haven't been any issues.

Our experience with customer service from Informatica has been excellent. They are always available and responsive.

Positive

The initial setup is generally straightforward. However, there can be some challenges during the on-prem installation process, even though we have the steps and prerequisites. Dealing with installation issues is quite common, but overall, it's not excessively complex to set up.

The need for maintenance depends on the team. Sometimes, the solution you configure in the tool determines the level of maintenance required. However, overall, maintenance hasn't been a significant issue.

Overall, I would rate the solution an eight out of ten. 

We use Informatica as our one-stop cloud integration solution. We are connecting two different data systems like SAP or Salesforce, integrating on-site financial data with some applications that process financial information like an ERP to plan budgets and forecast revenue. I'm creating a data warehouse and using that with tools like Power BI to create reports and dashboards.

Informatica is good for integrating data and cloud applications. We have connectors for integrating cloud applications like Salesforce. You can quickly integrate anything with an exposed API or a REST API.  The industry is increasingly shifting to the cloud, so we need more products that can connect to cloud-based applications. The integration is seamless and works in real time. It's also secure because you don't need to expose databases or tables. 

There is room for improvement at the highest level in terms of useability and connectors for various types of new applications. The row processing performance could be better because you experience some latency dealing with high volumes of data. Most organizations will be dealing with multiple cloud applications, so you could see performance issues moving from one system to another. 

I have worked with Informatica products for about seven or eight years.

I rate Cloud Data Integration seven out of 10 for stability. Even though Informatica is based in the cloud, it still depends on a secure agent deployed on-prem. The performance of the individual machine where you install the gateway can affect the stability. 

I rate Cloud Data Integration eight out of 10 for scalability. 

I rate Informatica support eight out of 10. They have a dedicated customer success portal where you can search a lot of knowledge base articles that tell you how to use Informatica in various scenarios. You can also use the portal to raise a support ticket describing your scenario, what you hope to achieve, and where you're having problems. The technical support responsiveness and dedicated customer support are decent enough. 

Positive

I have some experience with Azure Data Factory, and I worked with another Informatica product called PowerCenter. I switched to Informatica Cloud Data Integration because my customers' needs changed. More companies began prioritizing clouds. As developers, we also needed to scale up our services.

I'm not aware of the exact licensing cost because the senior management handles that, but I know that products like Azure Data Factory are less expensive than Informatica. At the same time, Informatica gives you more options and connectors. Everything is possible, whether you want to do API-based integration, traditional data integration, etc. 

Azure Data Factory is more useful for connecting with the Azure cloud. You can also play around with the native data integration tools that other cloud providers offer, like GCP or AWS.

I rate Informatica Cloud Data Integration eight out of 10. I recommend Informatica as an integration tool for large and medium-sized enterprises migrating to the cloud. Cost is something to keep in mind because Informatica might be too pricey for smaller companies. Large and medium-sized companies can easily afford it if they plan to use it as a one-stop solution for all their cloud integration and management needs.

If you need a middle layer to build your pipeline, that can be achieved using Azure Data Factory or any other data integration tool. Still, Informatica has some advantages in terms of connectors and help desk resources. When you contact the Informatica help desk, you can speak with engineers who helped develop the Informatica platform, so they have rich experience with integration technologies. The product itself is highly reliable and suitable for your integration needs. 

Azure Data Factory has almost 80 percent of the same features, and it might work for you if you have a Microsoft ecosystem. Using Data Factory is cheaper. However, if you're a large or medium-sized organization or a reseller and your data is more valuable, it might make more sense to use Informatica at that scale. You'll be interacting with many more types of applications and might need to integrate the applications in various ways.

We primarily use it as an enterprise-level firewall. 

I have to incorporate my particular data, schema into Axon. I can do it in two to three ways. Either I have to do a bulk upload feature in Axon, and I have to create an Excel sheet and I have to incorporate all the columns, all the attributes, all the asset columns, and their definitions, and everything into the Excel sheet and then I have to upload it. That is a manual process, and an SME has to be required to accomplish that feature.

The feature of auto-onboarding of the assets, enterprise assets via EDC is good. EDC will scan the data within the technical metadata, and then you can associate that technical metadata, and then Axon can consume that technical metadata and associate the business metadata to that technical metadata. Following some Axon systems, we have to create some systems to associate that technical metadata, as there has to be some logical hierarchy that has to be followed. It allows for some flexibility. You can have related features like policies, business glossaries, or maybe some regulatory compliance feature policies, et cetera, as well as governance.

If you have a DQ rule, data quality rule, on any particular subject area or any particular column, then one cannot create directly a rule in Axon. It has to ingest the technical tool we create in IDQ then into the Axon.

Informatica Axon itself is not a very complete tool. It's highly dependent on Enterprise Data Catalog and IDQ. Blending data catalog and IDQ makes it complete. When I say blending, I mean in the sense they have internal plugins, internal listeners. Axon has internal listeners for reading EDC, as well as IDQ components. EDC is Enterprise Data Catalog, which's a metadata catalog from Informatica.

I would like to have broader connectivity. Axon currently is limited. It cannot connect to any other application. It does not have any connectors for other applications. I want more applications to have connectivity to Axon. Axon should create more plugins for connecting to other applications, which are currently dominating the market.

The solution still is a bit manual in its functionality. We want t to be more automation-driven.

The solution needs to be more resilient.

I've been working with the solution for the last three years.

Currently, what happens in a week or two, the server goes for a toss because Axon still uses PostgreSQL as its database. They have all the services and they, basically, fetch all the backend tables. All the tables are in the PostgreSQL database. That is also a kind of constraint for Axon as PostgreSQL nowadays is a solution that no one uses. That's why the server always goes for a toss and we have to restart the server. They have to make it more resilient. The resilience is missing. 

For example, in EDC they have multiple nodes. When one node goes down, you can still use the backup node. You have to just configure it. In Axon, this does not work like that. They have to make it more vigilant instead of having to restart the cycle and again restart all the services, pre-configured services to get it up and running. That thing is a bit scary sometimes as, over in product staging and dev, it works, however, for production, if it goes down and we need our scanning and some processes running, then it's pretty tough.

Technical support, nowadays, is a bit of a let-down. They will reply once you raise a ticket. They normally categorize their ticket as a P1, P2, or P3. A P1 ticket is for production for the first failure and the P2 and P3 are for normal failures. They reply promptly, however, the response is not very good. Earlier, GCS, Global customer support used to make sense and be helpful. However, nowadays, their quality of service is really going down. The person that comes to attend the ticket is often not very equipped, or not technically not very capable.

Therefore, you need to have a regular follow-up. Normally what they do is not solve the problem. They will ask you, source this, the source that, and then send some kind of justification instead of trying to solve the issue. Sometimes the client is not technically equipped to answer their ticket. They want to see some logs which get embedded. They ask businesses for those logs. Then, the business has to log into Unix, find a particular folder, and access that backlog. These become a challenge for our business as there are not that many Unix-friendly people. In any case, it lengthens the process and draws out the resolution.. 

When I started, I was using version 6.3 and now it's 7.2.

The solution is on-prem in the sense that it's a web browser. It's browser-based so that you can use it on your desktop for unblocking your firewall. It's an enterprise firewall, you can deploy it. Since it's browser-based, it does not matter where the server is. The server can be on-prem and it can be deployed on an iPaaS service or other infrastructure at your service.

Informatica has created the Axon brand in such a way that it's kind of an interesting strategy for them. Once you have Axon you cannot buy it as a standalone product. You will always have to buy IDQ and EDC. That's a sales strategy. However, they really need to improve on their customer support. I really would advise Informatica to work on support. They really need to catch up on this, and they really need to add more qualified engineers to their customer support team to meet the client's expectations.

Overall, I would rate the solution at a seven out of ten.

We use Informatica Cloud Data Integration to load data from files to TelSource or Oracle tables. We also apply business rules to transform the data before loading it into the respective targets.

Most of the features are good. The advanced features like task flow and conditional integration are particularly useful. There are multiple transformations we can use in Dashflow, which are beneficial. We don't use features like centralization and data marketing because they aren't relevant to our use case. Our primary focus is on task flow, which allows us to design our jobs and execute them conditionally.

Some features require an additional license, such as Elastic Mappings. Most of the features provided are through Elastic Mappings, not the data integration service which causes restrictions. For example, the recently enabled source partitioning isn't applicable to Salesforce, which we use as our target or source. We primarily seek features that enhance performance for Salesforce and ICS Integration, aiming to reduce job execution time.

We don't have the license for Elastic Mapping, so we can't use that feature. Most of the new features added by Informatica are through Elastic Mapping. It would be helpful to have features like multithreading or partitioning for Salesforce to enhance performance.

I have been using Informatica Cloud Data Integration for five years.

The product is stable.

I rate the solution’s stability a seven out of ten.

20-30 users are using this solution.

I rate the solution’s scalability a five out of ten.

Support is good.

Positive

The initial setup is very easy. When I first started using it, I installed a 30-day trial version. I personally explored it during that period, and it was good.

It takes 30-40 minutes depending on the jobs.

I rate the initial setup a ten out of ten, where one is difficult, and ten is easy.

The team is very user-friendly, meeting our expectations much like PowerPoint does.

It supports integration with most cloud sources, including AWS, and has various cloud connectors. So, It's a good choice for anyone.

Overall, I rate the solution a seven out of ten.

We export APIs, and anyone can seek those APIs to have the data for target use cases. We hit the APIs that are exposed by external systems, and we get the data from them and process it.

We're using the latest version. It's deployed on cloud.

There are about five people who are using this solution in my organization.

We chose Cloud API Integration to connect to Salesforce.

The OAuth feature is the most valuable for authentication.

Recently, we're trying to connect to the Amazon API. There's no direct way to connect to Amazon APIs from Informatica Cloud. From Postman, there's a signature site called AWS Signature, which would actually generate the signatures for us with AWS APIs. In Informatica Cloud, we have to build the logic, and then we can generate the signature and hit the AWS APIs. Instead of generating that signature, it would be better if we could have the same connector in Informatica Cloud.

Sometimes when I open the processes or any service connectors, the labels are not properly displayed. The backend names are displayed rather than the front end label. I usually log out and log back in, and sometimes it disappears, and sometimes it doesn't.

I have used this solution for six years.

It's pretty stable. We don't have any concerns.

It's scalable.

I would rate technical support as six out of ten.

Setup is straightforward. It takes a week to do the installation and configuration.

It's not difficult to maintain.

I would rate this solution as eight out of ten. 

I would recommend this tool to other users.

Informatica Axon is typically used for data governance, where we establish policies and business glossaries.

Users can benefit from Axon's business lineage. Axon has something called Overlay, which can be used to extend the technical lineage. You can also extend it to stakeholders, all the compliance policies, and all the overlaying business rules. All of these can be seen in the same lineage.

I want to get a deeper understanding of the logic that is being used in the ETL. Informatica Axon does not provide complete transparency about the level of detailing you need and the logic used in ETL. I cannot use Google Fusion for ETL because I don't have a connector within Informatica Axon. I am stuck if I don't have a connector with an ETL tool.

One of the biggest disadvantages of Informatica is that it's very expensive. Many clients don't want to go with Informatica Axon because of its cost structure. You have to buy every component separately. If a customer wants governance, they obviously would need cataloging and lineage also.

Other tools like Collibra have cataloging, lineage, and governance in the same package. You don't need to buy them separately. With Informatica, you have to buy Axon for governance and EDC for cataloging and lineage. So, it becomes difficult for customers to pay for every component.

I have been using Informatica Axon for seven years.

We haven’t faced any stability issues with Informatica Axon.

Scalability is not really a factor in data governance because the volume and storage of metadata is not more than a couple of gigabytes.

The solution provides good technical support.

Positive

The solution's initial setup is easy, but you typically need Informatica support to run some of the preliminary tests. I've heard that the solution will be available on the cloud. Once it is available as software as a service (SaaS), you don't need to install it; you only need to configure it.

Typically, it takes around two days for the solution's installation and integration with the entire Active Directory and EDC. Then, it may take another day for testing. One engineer is enough to do all this work.

Only using Axon will not give you all the benefits, but you will see benefits when Axon, EDC, and IDQ are all plugged in together. It is difficult to get benefits from Axon as a standalone solution.

The solution's pricing model is easy, but it is very expensive.

Informatica Axon has a Marketplace that comes at an additional cost. Other tools like Collibra have built-in collaboration features, and you don't need to buy them separately. Collaboration features like collaborating on data sets, tagging them, and making a request are available in the Informatica Axon Marketplace.

It's not difficult to maintain the tool as long as someone has been trained in administration because Axon has many components. You need to understand how to change the logo of your screen size and how to change the dashboard wizard.

You also need to understand the product's configurations with other tools, personalize your dashboard, customize it, and add roles. There is a learning curve there. You need to train a person to be an administrator, and once they are trained, they can do the role better.

There is an NLP enabled with the solution, but it is not really that great. There is still room for growth in Informatica Axon's AI space.

Although expensive, Informatica Axon is very easy to learn, and you don't need to customize it much. Once you have the tool, you start uploading things. The solution is very easy to use because it has proper documentation and user guides.

If you want to set up business rules, Informatica Axon will give you a readymade template and ask you to start filling it out. You will be told about the mandatory and non-mandatory fields, and as long as you understand what the fields are required for, it's very easy to start filling out. Someone new to governance can get the hang of it and easily start filling in the details. You can have Axon implemented very quickly.

I am more involved with governance, cataloging lineage, EDC, and IDQ. I am getting a little bit into master data management and data security.

Overall, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.