Need advice about which tool to choose?Ask the StackShare community!
AWS Batch vs Airflow: What are the differences?
Introduction
AWS Batch and Airflow are both popular tools used in data processing and workflow management. However, there are key differences between these two tools that set them apart in terms of their features and capabilities.
Scalability: AWS Batch is a fully managed service that can dynamically scale the size and capacity of the compute resources used for data processing. It automatically provisions the necessary resources based on the job requirements, ensuring efficient utilization of resources. On the other hand, Airflow requires manual configuration and scaling of resources, making it less suitable for handling large-scale workloads without careful planning and management.
Complexity: Airflow is a more feature-rich and complex tool compared to AWS Batch. It provides a robust framework for creating, scheduling, and executing workflows with support for various task dependencies, operators, and sensors. AWS Batch, on the other hand, is a simpler service that focuses primarily on batch processing jobs without the extensive workflow management capabilities offered by Airflow.
Cost Structure: AWS Batch follows a pay-as-you-go pricing model, where you are charged based on the compute resources used and the duration of the jobs. This provides cost flexibility, as you only pay for the resources consumed. Airflow, on the other hand, is an open-source tool that can be deployed on your own infrastructure or cloud environment. While Airflow itself is free, the cost of infrastructure and maintenance needs to be considered.
Integration with AWS Services: As a service provided by AWS, AWS Batch seamlessly integrates with other AWS services such as EC2, S3, and IAM. This allows for easy access to data and resources stored in the AWS ecosystem. Airflow, being a standalone open-source tool, requires manual integration with AWS services, which may require additional configuration and setup effort.
Job Scheduling: Airflow provides fine-grained control over job scheduling and dependencies through its Directed Acyclic Graph (DAG) concept. Users can define complex workflows with conditional branches and specify dependencies between tasks. In contrast, AWS Batch provides basic job scheduling capabilities but lacks the advanced workflows and dependencies management features offered by Airflow.
Community and Ecosystem: Airflow has a thriving community and a rich ecosystem of plugins, making it highly extensible and customizable. There are numerous community-contributed operators, sensors, and hooks available, allowing users to integrate with various external systems and services. AWS Batch, being a managed service, has a more limited ecosystem and may have less community support for customizations and integrations.
In summary, AWS Batch is a scalable, managed service focused on batch processing jobs with seamless integration with AWS services, while Airflow is a feature-rich, complex tool providing advanced workflow management capabilities with a thriving community and ecosystem. The choice between the two depends on the specific requirements and complexity of your data processing and workflow needs.
I am so confused. I need a tool that will allow me to go to about 10 different URLs to get a list of objects. Those object lists will be hundreds or thousands in length. I then need to get detailed data lists about each object. Those detailed data lists can have hundreds of elements that could be map/reduced somehow. My batch process dies sometimes halfway through which means hours of processing gone, i.e. time wasted. I need something like a directed graph that will keep results of successful data collection and allow me either pragmatically or manually to retry the failed ones some way (0 - forever) times. I want it to then process all the ones that have succeeded or been effectively ignored and load the data store with the aggregation of some couple thousand data-points. I know hitting this many endpoints is not a good practice but I can't put collectors on all the endpoints or anything like that. It is pretty much the only way to get the data.
For a non-streaming approach:
You could consider using more checkpoints throughout your spark jobs. Furthermore, you could consider separating your workload into multiple jobs with an intermittent data store (suggesting cassandra or you may choose based on your choice and availability) to store results , perform aggregations and store results of those.
Spark Job 1 - Fetch Data From 10 URLs and store data and metadata in a data store (cassandra) Spark Job 2..n - Check data store for unprocessed items and continue the aggregation
Alternatively for a streaming approach: Treating your data as stream might be useful also. Spark Streaming allows you to utilize a checkpoint interval - https://spark.apache.org/docs/latest/streaming-programming-guide.html#checkpointing
Pros of Airflow
- Features53
- Task Dependency Management14
- Beautiful UI12
- Cluster of workers12
- Extensibility10
- Open source6
- Complex workflows5
- Python5
- Good api3
- Apache project3
- Custom operators3
- Dashboard2
Pros of AWS Batch
- Containerized3
- Scalable3
Sign up to add or upvote prosMake informed product decisions
Cons of Airflow
- Observability is not great when the DAGs exceed 2502
- Running it on kubernetes cluster relatively complex2
- Open source - provides minimum or no support2
- Logical separation of DAGs is not straight forward1
Cons of AWS Batch
- More overhead than lambda3
- Image management1