SAP HANA Reviews

I am currently using the latest version. But before that, before I jumped into the version, I used the initial version of HANA, as well. This initial version of HANA was not that great, it had a lot of bugs. But the latest version is very good. It's excellent.

I'm afraid that HANA is not a relational database, it's a column-level database just like Sybase IQ. Sybase is also an activity product, an SAP product. SAP bought Sybase in May 2010. So normal Sybase is RDBMS. Sybase has one more variant called Sybase IQ. That is not RDBMS, that is a column-level database. Normal Sybase is a whole-level database. That's a column-level database. So SAP HANA is based on this column-level architecture.

One more thing. The success of HANA primarily depends on the RAM and the storage. HANA became a success because the cost of the solar devices has fallen down substantially. I don't know about British Pounds, but in Indian Rupees, earlier in 2007, 2008, when I was working for Microsoft, one terabyte of a SAN device, used to cost around 22.5 LAK. I would say I would have had a 100,000. I think that's the nature. So one SAN device was costing 22 LAKs. The same SAN device, in 2013 and 2014, was costing around three LAKs. So the SAN device cost reduced by more than 200%.

Also, in parallel, the RAM cost also decreased, and the technology and the fastness of RAM increased. This impacted the primary condition for RDB and RDBMSs like Oracle, Sybase, SQL Server, and the like, that they need to support the foreign key relationship, where I have a few tables. For example, if I have five to six tables, suppose the first table is employment information. The second table is employee career details or his project, something like that.

Now, instead of populating the tables with the same information, the primary condition of RDBMS was to have a foreign key relationship between these two tables and reduce the redundancy. That was a primary condition, but in HANA, thanks to the cheap storage and high-speed RAM, I may not even bother to do a redundancy of data. I can combine all the tables and make a huge table. And as an entire table, whatever its size, I can pin the table in the RAM so that my access of information is not from the hard disk, but is directly from the memory, which is much, much, much faster. That is the beauty of HANA.

I'm still researching the features of HANA. In terms of memory, data access and data pitching, HANA has scored a victory, no doubt about that. But when I compare the non HANA architecture with SAP, ERP, the SAP ERP comes in two levels. SAP ECC, which is a non HANA based product, and SAP S/4HANA, which is a HANA-based product. If I compare these two, there are almost around 5,000 to 6,000 tables, which were merged together in HANA,  making it a robust architecture.

In earlier SAP we used to have fragmented, small-scale architecture. HANA is a robust architecture where one table itself is a behemoth quantity of many, many columns and a lot of redundant data. So my interest in HANA would be how SAP is catering to the demand of reducing the redundancy of data, and at the same time pinning the entire critical tables into the memory so that access to the data is faster. I am researching those factors.

I have roughly five years of experience in SAP HANA, because I started working on SAP ECC, on logistics and other components. After that, HANA became famous only in the years 2013 and 2014. Then I started pursuing HANA very, very actively. Right now, my journey is continuing and after five to six years I have a good amount of knowledge and experience on HANA.

It is stable.

SAP HANA is vertically and horizontally scalable.

Our banking system uses HANA primarily for our financial transactions. There are our SAP financials running on HANA. This HANA SAP was on the Oracle database. We have migrated it. It's very, very complex and took almost one year for us to prepare the plan and migrate to HANA finance. There are around 700 to 800 users using the database and they're not facing any problem. It's fantastic.

I would say I'm satisfied with technical support, buy it can be improved also. Improved in  terms of data warehousing, because HANA was introduced for data warehousing and because SAP wanted to catch the OLTP market. Now they have introduced many things to attract the OLTP customers, especially in banking and telecom sectors. That's okay. You have to keep your business interests also. HANA's architecture is the foundation of the language of data, warehousing, and design. For any project or product, if it's based on data warehousing, I would say HANA is the language for that because what data warehousing wants is a data warehousing database.

Primarily, it's not an OLDP, it's OLAP, online analytics processing. And where the data is not changed, the data doesn't change as frequently as a OLTB database. For that kind of environment, I think HANA needs a lot of improvement in terms of making it more columnar. It has to incorporate up level design a little bit harder, as well. 

You know MySQL database? Not Microsoft, MySQL. Microsoft is not SQL. M-Y-S-Q-L, has been bought by Oracle. Oracle bought MySQL, it acquired the MySQL company. If you look into the database, by default, MySQL engine is InnoDB. InnoDB is the default engine on MySQL. But, MySQL also gives you the flexibility of choosing your own engine. I don't want to know InnoDB, I have a huge Microsoft Excel file with around 10,000 rows, but I don't want to use InnoDB because I have to pay for that. To save those costs, at the time of starting MySQL engine, I can choose my type of data. Instead of InnoDB, I can choose Excel also. SAP HANA should give that kind of flexibility to its customers, making it more reachable to small SMEs, small and medium enterprises.

Now it is simple, because thanks to the cloud approach, it is giving a lot of flexibility to the customer, but if it wants to attack, hit the right target, acquiring the very, very small scale customer, who has around max 50 terabytes data or 100 terabyte data, a small scale company, small companies, that market should also be captured by SAP, not only the big companies. As the English saying goes, small things count. You can't ignore small things.

The initial setup is pretty straightforward. The only thing was there were a lot of parameters which had to be taken into consideration and any parameter at installation will be paid. But one good thing about SAP HANA is even if you miss a single parameter, you cannot agree to it for the steps. The further steps will tell you that, "you have missed this step. You first complete it, then you can come here." That kind of interlinking is there. So yes, SAP installation is pretty straightforward, and very easy and smooth.

I would recommend SAP HANA. No doubt I would definitely recommend it. But the thing is, if I adopt SAP HANA, my total cost of ownership in terms of having a functional consultant, as well as a HANA admin, would increase. I should first find a balance and analyze the data, "Do I really want to have HANA? What benefit will I have if I have HANA at my premises? And if I want to cut cost but also get the benefits of HANA, will the cloud option of HANA cater to my needs?" All those questions.

That is the company analysis I should do: what do they do differently? But many companies will be driven by the business needs, but at the same time some companies will also be driven by factors like the existing relationship with other vendors, like Oracle or SQL Server, and the kind of discounts they get when they buy that product. All those things will be there as driving factors. To answer your question, I would definitely recommend SAP HANA to anyone.

High availability and disaster recovery are very poor in HANA. High availability is measured on the barometer of RPO and RTO. RPO stands for recovery point objective, RTO stands for recovery time objective. The graph in which these two factors will be measured is from the five nines, the seven nines, or the three nines, that kind of factor. But it is a factor of my high availability. 99.9% of my database is available or 99.99999999%, giving a chance of 0.0001% for some kind of availability failure is because of natural disaster or some kind of electrical failures or something like that. So those are the factors you have to see for high availability.

My SAP HANA, technically, can withstand those calamities and recover itself from that disaster. That is called high availability. That high availability is there, but it is very, very, very minimal. If you're talking about high availability of HANA in actual high availability markets compared to Oracle and other RDBMS, HANA is a small child. If you remember when Microsoft SQL Server came into the RDBS market back in the year 1997, when they introduced the SQL 97, then they introduced the SQL 2000, SQL 2005. At that time, they introduced the high availability called Windows Cluster log shipping, mirroring the application.

At that time, in 2007 and 2008, Oracle introduced RAC, Real Application Clusters. Compared to the features of real application clusters, the Microsoft product was a small child. And Microsoft took that as a challenge and they improved and they improved. And in 2012 they introduced something called Always On. Always On is an improved version of high availability in SQL Server. HANA has to do that kind of stuff. HANA's high availability is immature.

On a scale of one to ten, I would rate SAP HANA an eight.

I primarily use the solution for data visualization and modeling. I've used the solution only from time to time for specific projects. 

The data modeling feature is the most useful to me. 

For my use case, it works very well. 

It's stable and reliable. 

I haven't used every aspect of the solution, so it is hard to consider what might be missing. 

It could be a bit more scalable. 

I do not have extensive experience with the solution. I've used it for five or six months so far. 

It is a stable solution. It's quite reliable. There are no bugs or glitches. 

The scalability is okay. I'd rate it six out of ten. It could be better. 

We have ten to 12 people using the solution right now. 

I'm not sure if we have plans to increase the usage. 

I've never contacted technical support. I can't speak to the level of support they provide. 

I did not previously use another similar solution. 

I did not handle the initial setup at all. I'm not sure how the deployment went or what the process was. 

I'm unsure of the exact licensing cost. 

I'm using the latest version of the solution. I'm an end user, just not an expert. 

I'd recommend the solution to others. 

It's a good solution if you are already using SAP. 

I'd rate the solution six out of ten. 

My clients are using a specific technique called an in-memory database that is used with SAP HANA.

The solution can be deployed on the cloud and on-premises.

The most valuable feature of SAP HANA is the modeling of the databases.

The solution could improve in the handling of backup data and the administration tools.

I have been using SAP HANA for approximately seven years.

The solution is stable.

SAP HANA is scalable.

I have received a good response from the support from SAP HANA. However, the speed of the response could be better.

The standard way to implement the solution does not take a lot of time. However, if you need to use specific deployment options, called distributions, in the replication. It takes a lot of time for the configuration. The maximum time of deployment will be three days.

The steps taken for the implementation of the solution are sizing the resources, cloud or on-premise, and determining what modules will be required. The most important is figuring out the prerequisites and then starting the deployment. We have to check to see if all the licenses are in place, do application appraisals, and review the whole system.

There is a yearly subscription to use SAP HANA. There is a fee for maintenance.

I have over 50 customers using this solution.

I rate SAP HANA an eight out of ten.

We use SAP HANA for our BW system, which is the system we use for our BI tools and BI reports.

What's most valuable in SAP HANA is that it covers the business process systems of my company. The solution also helps because it makes almost everything automated. Another valuable feature of SAP HANA is that it can be integrated with third parties and other enhancements needed by the company.

What needs improvement in SAP HANA is its automation, in particular, it needs more enhancements in that area.

Right now, what I need is already covered by SAP HANA, so I have no additional features in mind for it.

I've been using SAP HANA for four years.

SAP HANA is a stable and reliable solution.

SAP HANA is a scalable solution.

The technical support for SAP HANA is good. On a scale of one to five, I'm rating SAP support five out of five.

The initial setup for SAP HANA isn't complex. It would depend on what you need, but it's easy because you just need to define the business process and blueprint, get approval from your business team and technical team, build the structures, get approval, then configure, assign, and get approval again so you can start working on SAP HANA.

The total time it takes to deploy SAP HANA would depend on the gathering of information, checking what prevails, arranging it correctly, getting the approval, then proceeding with the deployment. You should have a plan regarding the timing, the processes, the resource, the budget, etc., for the deployment of SAP HANA.

On a scale of one to five, I'm rating the implementation of SAP HANA as five out of five.

SAP HANA is more expensive than other solutions.

I'm working on data selection, upgrading database engines, and updating database versions. I'm the IT Application Manager, so I assist in those areas.

I'm working on the latest version of SAP HANA.

My company has an SLA contract with SAP for the maintenance of SAP HANA, which means that the SAP team will take care of the maintenance. You also have the option to cover the maintenance yourself if you have a team of SAP HANA consultants and seniors.

In my current organization, a total of five hundred people use SAP HANA.

I would recommend SAP HANA to others, particularly for business process needs. You need to make sure that the solution is already defined for your organization's business process. For example, if you're in the manufacturing industry, then SAP HANA should be defined for manufacturing. You shouldn't have to make many customizations to it. This is what you need to check first. SAP HANA should cover all and automate your business processes without needing a lot of customizations.

My rating for SAP HANA is nine out of ten.

My company is a customer of SAP.

The most valuable feature of SAP HANA is its performance and integration.

The solution could improve by having better migration flexibility. For example, it would be helpful if there was a way for customers could check their nonproduction and production deployments.

Integrating SAP HANA with BTP HANA is difficult and there should be guides available.

I have been using SAP HANA for approximately seven years.

The solution is highly reliable.

I rate the stability of SAP HANA a nine out of ten.

We have more than 100 people using the solution.

I rate the scalability of SAP HANA a ten out of ten.

I have had good responses from the support.

I rate the support from SAP HANA a ten out of ten.

Positive

I have used MongoDB and SQL.

The initial setup of SAP HANA was simple. The process can take approximately 45 minutes.

The licensing could improve.

One person can manage the maintenance of the solution.

I recommend this solution to others.

I rate SAP HANA a ten out of ten.

I was using the product for some research in technical drawings - in terms of making some drawings, the different parts, and the structure of the machinery. I don't know if it's available in the SAP HANA, however, there is a model for this to schedule the maintenance. The company wasn't using it. Sometimes the product furnishes a lot of insights, cultural insights that the company still is not ready to implement.

The solution offers advanced features that the company was struggling to implement. For example, in terms of parts, you can't implement a lot of structures of the machinery, however, you still need to use the codes. They're not related one to another, which makes them hard to find, typically. That means every time you need it to buy an entire assembly of parts, you need to know exactly which one you had. You have to use a drawing, a technical drawing, that specifies each code that you need. SAP saves you from asking to bring an entire assembly with a lot of parts. That's a powerful aspect that could help to reduce hours of work that are wasted in this way.

A documents preview could be helpful. Today we have a lot of documents, for example, in PDF formats, which we would like to preview. We'd even just like to click on an icon and have it open another tab. That way, I can see the document directly inside SAP HANA. In the company I was working with, we had a parallel system which meant we needed to go to SAP, see the code, see the drawing number, and then go to another system that is finished by Autodesk, and then find the drawing and open it. This is a lot of work.

I really would like to just have it inside this app. 

I'd like the product to have more mobile aspects. Many younger users want mobility and flexibility.

The solution can be expensive. In Brazil, many companies still do pretty much everything in Brazil, and, if they want to try a new solution, they want to try it at zero cost. Many, therefore, will look for open-source solutions before they even consider SAP.

I've used the solution over the last 12 months. 

It's very stable. Sometimes it gets a little slow, however, that might be a company issue. When it came to the internet the entire site wasn't that good. Sometimes you had too many people connecting and the company was using a lot of Google solutions. You noticed that when a lot of people are in virtual meetings, we would have internet connections affected.

I'm not sure about the scalability.

I don't know if you can use it in a Docker or if you can scale it in SQL and you can maintain the speed, or if you are talking about, for example, big data. The infrastructure of the company seemed to be weighed down, for example, when there were a lot of virtual meetings and it affected the internet. I can't speak to if this problem would also affect being able to scale the product.

I would describe technical support as good. It's always worked for me and therefore I have no complaints. 

I didn't handle the initial implementation. The company furnished all the equipment needed for me to work. They gave me the computer, which Red Hat was installed on. They just give me access and showed me where to access what I needed and where to put the ID and password. I didn't do anything.

Typically there are six people that are available for maintenance tasks. They're IT technicians.

SAP solutions are typically quite expensive.

I'm a partner and consultant. 

I'm not sure which version of the product I am on.

I'd advise new users that it's important to first find a solution that can understand the culture that's involved inside this solution. Sometimes people think that ERP software like SAP are magical things that you just install it and it makes life easier. It doesn't work like this. You need to have the culture, you have to have this knowledge. You need to understand how it works and how much it requires from you. It requires more than you think. It doesn't work like magic.

I'd rate the solution at a nine out of ten. It's very good, however, there's always room for improvement. 

We use it for database virtualization.

The main feature is that the processes are very flexible, they are able to be adapted to the business and their departments. The solution is very good and has covered all functional areas needed in this type of solution.

There could be better management for faster updates, last year there were some changes in India to the e-invoicing feature. During that time, there was a couple of updates that we had to wait until the release happened before we could do the implementation, this was a time we had to wait. They are pretty good at releasing updates but that time it was not the fastest.

I have been using the solution for a few months.

I have found the solution to be stable, it is very robust.

There is the ability to scale the solution by increasing capacity with no problem, it is very flexible. We have almost 34,000 users using the solution.

We had some issue with support in the past because they did not have enough availability. However, they have improved and now they are okay. 

Since we have been using the solution before we did not have any issues with the install. There were not any major complex operations. However, there were some challenges but we had the full documentation with us and it was not a problem. 

The price of the solution could be reduced, it is expensive. If they wanted to go into other industries and sectors the cost is on the higher side. They cannot go into each and every sector. If the cost was more reasonable, then it would be easy for them to enter more markets. This would be a disruptor in the industry because it would be used more often than other solutions, which would be good for the company.

I do recommend this solution but at the same time, it is expensive. The cost will not be able to be afforded by everyone such as medium and small scale businesses.

I rate SAP HANA an eight out of ten.

SAP HANA is one of the best databases known for its performance. Since the solution offers a functionality known as in-memory computing, its performance cannot be measured with other databases. If a customer has a large amount of data, especially data in gigabytes or terabytes, because of which they face performance issues, then SAP HANA is the database for them.

SAP HANA should go for big data solutions as well. So, SAP HANA is good for large enterprises and large databases. Even for large databases, we have to rely on other tools, especially those that fall under big data solutions. Hence, SAP HANA needs to be a part of big data solutions.

SAP HANA has almost all the features, and with every new release, they are introducing some new features because of the development team working on the solution. The solution has started supporting its integration with other applications, which can ensure the solution's development. The solution's development platform should be more flexible and scalable to adapt to other solutions. In short, the development environment of the solution needs to improve. Such improvements will make the integration and adaptation of the solution more flexible.

For almost four to five years, I have been working on SAP HANA. I am not only an end user of the solution but also a part of a company that provides the solution to its customers.

The new version of the solution is stable. SAP HANA Version 1.0 had some performance issues, but after SAP HANA Version 2.0 got introduced, the solution became more stable. So there is no need to put in more effort since most things have become automated in the solution.

It's a scalable product. Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten. Presently, we have around 15 customers.

Since I haven't faced any issues with the solution, I haven't contacted technical support yet.

The solution's initial setup was straightforward.

Only one or two days were required for the deployment part, which the technical department took care of in our organization.

If SAP provides simple and standard documentation to its users explaining every solution process in detail, the steps to deploy the solution can be simplified. In short, the deployment process won't take long if one follows the documentation. Also, it will ensure that the users do not have to get involved in any troubleshooting steps or face any other problems while using the solution.

Only one system administrator is required to deploy and maintain the solution.

SAP offers a license for both ERP and HANA, which means that if you purchase SAP ERP, you will be provided with a license that covers both products. In the case of on-premises deployment, the license is perpetual, which means that you only need to pay for annual maintenance. On the other hand, for cloud deployment, licensing payments are made on a yearly subscription basis.

While the cost of the license may seem high, it is important to note that the benefits of the solution far outweighs the cost. Therefore, it can be considered a normal cost.

I would tell those planning to use the solution that it works fine but needs to become more portable. The solution should also be made capable of supporting non-SAP application environments. Overall, I rate the solution a ten out of ten.