Snowflake Reviews

The primary use case is for building a database and data link.

I like the ability to work with a managed service on the cloud and that is easy to start with.

From the documentation, the black box is not very descriptive. Snowflake does not reveal how exactly the data is processed or sourced.

I have been using Snowflake for three years now.

The stability is reliable and a standard product.

The scalability is very good and we have around two hundred data sets currently operating.

Technical support is good. It is readily available and they are very responsive.

Positive

The initial setup was straightforward.

You can do the implementation in-house since it is a managed service and only takes a few hours.

The pricing is economical as compared to traditional solutions like Oracle and competitive pricing.

I would rate Snowflake a nine out of ten.

My company wanted to have all our data in one single place and this what we use Snowflake for. Snowflake also allows us to build connectors to different data sources. The ultimate goal is to provide reporting and analytics to all departments in the company.

This solution could be improved by offering machine learning apps. 

We have used this solution for one year. 

This is a stable solution. 

This is a scalable solution. 

Before Snowflake, we used Azure.

I worked with a Microsoft partner to set up the entire thing. This took three months. 

We have not yet experienced ROI. 

Overall, this is a helpful tool with a friendly interface. 

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

I use this solution to create a proof of concept. I also create training for companies on Snowflake.

It is a very easy-to-use solution. It is user-friendly, and its setup time is very less.

They have a new console, but I couldn't figure out anything in the new console. So, if I shift to the old console, I can figure out where to create the database schema and other things, but I have no idea where to go in the new console. That's one thing they can improve. I don't know why they created a new console to confuse. The old, classic console is much better.

I started using Snowflake three months ago. 

It is stable.

It is scalable.

It is so easy that I didn't have to look for technical support. Its documentation is amazingly simple.

I also use Databricks for proof of concept and training. I have used Databricks much longer than Snowflake. Both have their own pros and cons.

In terms of ease of use, UI, and setup time, Snowflake is good. I would rate Snowflake a nine out of 10 from these aspects. In terms of workload, Databricks has higher points. The underlying infrastructure is faster for Databricks, which is not the case with Snowflake. Snowflake is a cloud database. So, in terms of processing power, Databricks has an advantage over Snowflake. Databricks is more suitable for larger workloads, whereas, for a regular or typical data warehouse that you want to run on the cloud, Snowflake is more suitable. 

Its setup was easy. You can create a connection and be up and running within half an hour.

I set it up myself.

I have not been billed yet, but it should be less. I'm still running the trial version, but it seems to be less than Databricks.

You must try it out. It is a wonderful product. I would also recommend trying out other products, such as Yellowbrick, and doing a comparison. Redshift has also come up with some serverless options. BigQuery is also there. BigQuery is as easy as Snowflake. So, my recommendation or advice is to try out these things and then pick the one that suits you. I don't have any bias towards any of the products. I have an impartial opinion about all the cloud data warehousing products.

I would rate it a nine out of 10.

We are completely migrating to Snowflake, and we are in transition. It is primarily to combine all our data repositories into a single place. We have SAP BW and SAP HANA, and some of our business units have their own databases. We chose Snowflake to consolidate all of our data into a single place and then build enterprise data. We are then going to provide the data for our businesses in shared databases, on which they would do reporting. They will also have the ability to bring in their own data, which is currently not possible. They will also be able to do advanced analytics, machine learning, and AI in Snowflake, which is not fully possible on our current platforms. It will be used for all the operational reporting, such as sales, supply chain, appraising, and merchandising. We just started to do reporting related to sales and supply chain inventory.

We have its latest version. It is currently deployed on Amazon AWS, but we are moving to Google.

There are so many features that Snowflake offers to address the challenges that people have been facing in the traditional data warehouses for a long time. It allows us to have a single repository for all the data. Currently, we have data repositories all over the place, and we want to bring everyone onto one platform so that it can be utilized across the organization. Currently, we need database administrators and SAP administrators to manage multiple databases and platforms. With Snowflake, we don't need any admin, and there is zero maintenance. All we need is a platform architect who can just manage the Snowflake platform to create databases and security roles, and then you can share the data. By integrating everything into a single Snowflake platform, we have lowered the total cost of ownership quite a bit.

The ability to share the data and the ability to scale up and down easily are the most valuable features. The concept of data sharing and data plumbing made it very easy to provide and share data. The ability to refresh your Dev or QA just by doing a clone is also valuable. It has the dynamic scale up and scale down feature. 

Development and deployment are much easier as compared to other platforms where you have to go through a lot of stuff. With a tool like DBT, you can do modeling and transformation within a single tool and deploy to Snowflake. It provides continuous deployment and continuous integration abilities.

There is a separation of storage and compute, so you only get charged for your usage. You only pay for what you use. When we share the data downstream with business partners, we can specifically create compute for them, and we can charge back the business.

They need to incorporate some basic OLAP capabilities in the backend or at the database level. Currently, it is purely a database. They call it purely a data warehouse for the cloud. Currently, just like any database, we have to calculate all the KPIs in the front-end tools. The same KPIs again need to be calculated in Snowflake. It would be very helpful if they can include some OLAP features. This will bring efficiency because we will be able to create the KPIs within Snowflake itself and then publish them to multiple front-end tools. We won't have to recreate the same in each project. 

There should be the ability to automate raised queries, which is currently not possible. There should also be something for Exception Aggregation and things like that.

I have been using this solution for two years.

It is all cloud. It is really stable. We haven't seen any problems.

We can scale up or down based on our needs. We don't have tons and tons of data, but based on the quality feedback from our vendors, it can handle large volumes and has the competency. With the dynamic scale-up feature, we are confident that it is going to meet all our requirements.

Currently, our number of users is very limited because we have just started the migration. We don't have many users on the platform. All of our focus is on Snowflake because we're moving to Snowflake, and its usage will increase in the future.

I do not directly interact with the support, but I believe our platform architect reached out, and he got a response.

We had SAP BW and SAP HANA as our main data platforms. We are slowly decommissioning SAP BW and SAP HANA and completely migrating to Snowflake. We wanted to have a single repository for all the data. The cost was also a factor.

It is straightforward. To expose the data in the cloud, we had to go through our info security and legal, so that's the part that took time. After that is done, the process for setting up the platform, getting signed up with the initial free credits, and signing up the licensing for the credits was straightforward.

We are working with a system integrator or vendor for this project. Our strategy is to work with an experienced vendor for the first project, and after that, we would be able to drive things forward.

Our experience with them is good. They're building the architecture of Snowflake. They have experience, and we have our own thoughts. We are working together and making sure that the architecture is for the long-term and not just for one project. Whenever we see that their focus is limited to the project, we are asking them questions to make sure that they are making the right decision.

In terms of maintenance, it doesn't require any maintenance, but you do require architects. We have three architects. One architect is responsible for the platform and takes care of creating security rules, grants, and users. We also have an integration architect who is responsible for data acquisition, ETL, and stuff like that. We have a data architect who is responsible for the overall data architecture in terms of what layers we need to establish and how do we model the data and publish that for consumption.

There is a separation of storage and compute, so you only pay for what you use. 

The key part is skill set because Snowflake is all SQL-driven data warehousing. Internally, we have some SAP BW development resources, and they need to learn and move on to understanding SQL-based coding and custom data warehousing concepts.

I would rate Snowflake a nine out of ten.

Snowflake is used for very large data, such as in the case where tables might contain 600 to 700 million records.

It's ultra-fast at handling queries, which is what we find very convenient.

The pricing and licensing model is good.

Snowflake has support for stored procedures, but it is not that powerful. They have a lot of limitations. For example, it is really basic and there are limitations on subqueries.

The functions are not very good. Improving this would help to make sure data manipulation much easier. Right now, the inbuilt stored procedures and functions are all Java-based.

I Have been using SnowFlake for about five months.

We have approximately 10 people in the organization who are using Snowflake.

The technical support is very good.

We use Snowflake in conjunction with Matillion, which is another AWS-based ETL tool. It is being used as a bridge between our on-premises data and Snowflake. 

The initial setup is very straightforward. You simply log in and start using it.

When it comes to deployment, you can choose between the AWS and Azure cloud. We chose AWS.

It is easy to create an instance and you can do it yourself if you have an AWS account. Snowflake will give you the connection ID and other relevant details.

The pricing is flexible in that, for example, if I run a query and it is slow then I can increase the processing power while it is still running, and they charge more for the time. The cost is on a per-query basis.

If you're running with a base processor, called a warehouse, the query might cost 1.0 cents. But, if my query is slow and I want to increase the speed, the next level adds a little more cost to that.

On average, with the number of queries that we run, we pay approximately $200 USD per month.

Recently, we have been doing a review of Redshift. However, we finally decided to go with Snowflake.

My advice for anybody who is considering Snowflake is that it is a really good product, especially if you are having issues with Big Data. It is not good for a typical OLTP environment, such as a small table.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

Our aim was to migrate everything from on-premise, so we just migrated as it is and then we had issues. Some use cases that were running on-premises were not installed. We just went through each case and then finalized the issues with some of the packages that were not working or some users that were not getting what they were expecting. We did deep analysis on each and every case and then looked for options in Snowflake and are now working with the team to move everything over to Snowflake. 

The data warehouse is one of the great concepts of Snowflake. The coding plans are also a great feature. You can switch out the values or sizes. 

It would be helpful if implementation could be handled more on the user-side. We need to train the users on best practices and how to use the solution properly. It's a cost issue. If they don't run it properly then it'll end up costing more money.

There are some stored procedures that we've had trouble with. The solution also needs to fine-tune the connectors to be able to connect into the system source.

The solution is stable. We had only one failure, but that was because of AWS issues. Beyond that, I haven't seen anything else. From the Snowflake side, within 10 minutes they reported the AWS issue. It was under two hours of downtime because of the quick response.

As long as you don't need to worry about storage or cost, this solution would be one of the best ones on the market for scalability purposes. We've migrated about 400-450 dealers onto the solution so far. We do intend to expand usage so there will be more users and more data. The drawbacks we've had with on-premises was space being a constraint and the user code having limitations.

Customer support is good. There is always someone who's going to respond. They will let you know what can be done and what is possible.

We did some testing and some comparisons, but it's all set up now and running fine. The deployment took about three months. Since we didn't want to disrupt the on-premises, or overload the system, we did most of the migrations on the weekend.

For maintenance, in the beginning, until you are through with training and performance tuning, you will need more people. You might need to start with seven or so, and then, for ongoing work, probably one or two people can manage it. 

We had a Snowflake consultant on-site that assisted us with the implementation.

It's an expensive solution. We can't predict exactly how much until we've streamlined everything and the user requirements have been completed, but normally they charge on the storage, which depends upon the average storage amount used for the month.

We looked at IBM because it also has on-premise solutions. We also looked at Azure as well as AWS.

Because most of the issues you come across can be dealt with on the user's sites, it's important to educate the users and understand their requirements.

The best advice I can give is to understand the product and to try to stick to what is required. From the business side, you need to monitor usage and monitor the space because of on-premises constraints. If it gets filled up then you will have to react. However, this solution is very scalable. 

I would rate this solution between seven and eight out of ten. The solution still has some constraints that need to be addressed.

We use this product basically for developing an IoT (Internet of Things). Currently, we are sending data from our S3 (Simple Storage Service) storage. In the future, we are planning to directly stream data to Snowflake.

In terms of features, we have not yet explored the product completely. So we are still in the proof of concept phase. As of now, the product meets our preliminary requirements. The snapshot feature is good and the rollback feature is good. That is why we have the product and these are the key things we need.

The recovery process is very simple and very user-friendly as well. The constraint files could be improved. But the most important things are there. Also, the interface is good to work with and user-friendly.

If I had to say what needs improvement, in my experience is that the availability is a problem. Availability should be high and has to be enhanced.

I still have not explored all of the existing features. Because I have not been deeply involved with using the program it is hard to say what else is missing or what I would need.

We have just explored the product for a few months.

The stability of Snowflake is very good.

Scalability is very good and very simple.

Within the company, we currently have a total of fewer than 50 people using the product. Their general roles vary from data analyst to data scientist, to IT professionals, and maybe one or two of the upper managers.

I tried using technical support once and they were very helpful. But after that, I have not had any reason to explore the support services.

The initial setup was simple.

The implementation was done by the vendor.

Before choosing to work with Snowflake we looked at virtual solutions and we looked at Redshift, we looked at Qubole and a couple of other cloud options. Earlier when we did a mining site, I was working with Alteryx, so I was already familiar with that product and its capabilities to use for comparison. We decided to go with Snowflake because it seemed mature and had what we wanted.

My advice to someone who is looking at Snowflake is that if they are looking at analytics tools in addition to warehousing and certain advantages of cloud computing, then I would suggest Snowflake. But if they are just looking for the warehousing part where you will later just use another solution on top of it, then I would not suggest Snowflake.

On a scale from one to ten where one is the worst and ten is the best, I would rate Snowflake as an eight or nine. Let's say 8.5.

Basically, if at all, we wanted to have an interface for data warehouses on the cloud which worked on Azure or AWS. Snowflake, provides a more intuitive, rapid user interface where people can connect and maintain warehouses and share data among the people in the companies easily. Its pricing model and the model have made maintaining virtual warehouses simpler.

I appreciate the Snowflake marketplace, where you can drop data and allow other people throughout the world to access it. You can go to the Snowflake marketplace and connect to some data. If somebody else publishes, for example, COVID-19 data or weather data, you can sign up for new data sets and bring them into your warehouse, which I found very interesting.

You can connect to different cloud sources, including Azure and AWS. 

You can report out, and all the cloud technologies have connected to Snowflake, allowing you to move the data or get the data into Snowflake. 

The initial setup was pretty simple. 

It scales really well. 

The solution is stable. 

The solution is reasonably priced. 

I don't know about GCP, if they have connected for GCP. If they don't, they should allow for it.

Overall, they're doing great. I don't have any specific complaints or improvements that need to happen.

I've used the solution for a couple of years now. 

The solution is quite stable since everything is in the cloud, and the data these days has become cheap with storage and everything in the cloud. Through clusters and warehouses, sizes can be increased or decreased based on usage, and they can be turned on and turned off. Sustainability-wise, I think it's a pretty good solution.

It is scalable. The warehouses or auto-scaling features in the warehouses are great. You can go from small to medium to large all the way up to extra large, and there are different auto-scaling tasks that can happen. You can turn it on and turn it off based on the usage or auto-turn it on and turn it off. That's a pretty nice feature to have and we find it both sustainable and scalable for sure.

I work for clients, so last time when I worked for a client, there was a group of 100 people who were actually signed up to use Snowflake. 

I've never dealt with technical support. We did have people from Snowflake working with us directly, and we never ran into any issues that needed troubleshooting. The personnel from Snowflake, of course, would resolve whatever came up. 

I come from an Azure background as well, so Microsoft also comes with Azure Synapse, where it's a similar functionality as Snowflake, where it's warehousing on the cloud. Azure Synapse is also good. I'm unaware of AWS or GCP, and I heard that Google Cloud Platform also has Big Query and big data capabilities, which are tough competitors for Snowflake and other cloud warehousing tools.

The implementation process was pretty straightforward. I didn't set it up, though. I used an already set up version. I just had to connect. I had to push data from Azure to Snowflake, create tables there, and have data loaded into those tables, and that's it. I wasn't doing anything else, so I didn't work on the infrastructure of Snowflake.

You would need a group of two or three people to maintain the product.

I work for a consulting firm, so I don't work for the client, so I really don't know what the company used for deployment.

Licensing was based on the warehouse. I don't recall it being very expensive. 

I'm a consultant and end-user.

I'm not currently using the solution right now and do not recall the last version I was on. 

Now, I'm working for a different client on a different platform altogether. My company, as such, doesn't use Snowflake since we are in consulting. We have expertise in something, and then we help the clients deliver that solution on the technology.

Potential new users should just definitely give it a shot. They should start off with a POC, proof of concept, for the data that they have, and then, if everything works well and they can migrate in a cost-effective way. 

I would recommend Snowflake to start off with since it's just picking up over the last couple of years. If I have to recommend anything, however, it would be more Microsoft tools I would recommend since that all comes as a package. You can do Synapse and Azure Data Factory, which is  for ETL. You can also do Azure Data Lake Storage. There are different things that you can do when you buy something in a package like that. That said, I definitely recommend Snowflake if someone wants to give it a shot.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.