Need advice about which tool to choose?Ask the StackShare community!
Amazon Athena vs Delta Lake: What are the differences?
Introduction
Amazon Athena and Delta Lake are both data storage and processing solutions that are widely used in the industry. While they have similarities in terms of their ability to handle large volumes of data and execute queries, there are key differences that set them apart. In this article, we will highlight the main differences between Amazon Athena and Delta Lake.
Query Engine vs Storage Format: The fundamental difference between Amazon Athena and Delta Lake lies in their core functionality. Amazon Athena is primarily a query engine that allows you to run SQL queries on data stored in different formats like CSV, JSON, or Parquet. On the other hand, Delta Lake is a storage format that enables ACID transactions and schema enforcement, making it well-suited for data lakes and data warehouses.
Data Partitioning: Partitioning data is a crucial technique for improving query performance on large datasets. When it comes to data partitioning, Amazon Athena relies on the directory structure of the underlying data to optimize queries. In contrast, Delta Lake provides an optimized mechanism for partitioning data based on defined columns, which can significantly enhance query execution time.
Data Versioning and Concurrency Control: Versioning and concurrency control are essential features for maintaining data integrity in a multi-user environment. Delta Lake offers built-in support for data versioning and concurrency control, allowing multiple users to concurrently read and write data without conflicts. Amazon Athena, however, does not provide native support for these features and relies on external mechanisms for achieving similar functionality.
Schema Evolution: As data evolves over time, it often requires schema changes to accommodate new fields or alterations in existing ones. Delta Lake offers robust schema evolution capabilities, allowing you to seamlessly evolve schemas across different versions of data. In contrast, Amazon Athena expects the data to adhere to a fixed schema, and any schema changes require manual adjustments.
Performance Optimization: Both Amazon Athena and Delta Lake strive to provide optimal query performance, but they employ different techniques. Amazon Athena leverages query optimizations and parallel execution to achieve fast query speeds. Delta Lake, on the other hand, utilizes various performance optimization techniques, such as data skipping and caching, to boost query execution and reduce data scans.
Integration with Data Ecosystem: Delta Lake integrates well with various data processing frameworks, such as Apache Spark, allowing you to leverage advanced data processing capabilities. Amazon Athena, on the other hand, is tightly integrated with the AWS ecosystem and seamlessly interacts with other AWS services, making it an ideal choice for users heavily reliant on AWS infrastructure.
In summary, Amazon Athena primarily serves as a query engine while Delta Lake is a storage format with built-in features like ACID transactions, schema enforcement, and versioning. Delta Lake offers more advanced capabilities such as optimized data partitioning, schema evolution, and concurrency control. On the other hand, Amazon Athena excels in integration with the AWS ecosystem and provides fast query performance through optimizations and parallel execution.
Hi all,
Currently, we need to ingest the data from Amazon S3 to DB either Amazon Athena or Amazon Redshift. But the problem with the data is, it is in .PSV (pipe separated values) format and the size is also above 200 GB. The query performance of the timeout in Athena/Redshift is not up to the mark, too slow while compared to Google BigQuery. How would I optimize the performance and query result time? Can anyone please help me out?
you can use aws glue service to convert you pipe format data to parquet format , and thus you can achieve data compression . Now you should choose Redshift to copy your data as it is very huge. To manage your data, you should partition your data in S3 bucket and also divide your data across the redshift cluster
First of all you should make your choice upon Redshift or Athena based on your use case since they are two very diferent services - Redshift is an enterprise-grade MPP Data Warehouse while Athena is a SQL layer on top of S3 with limited performance. If performance is a key factor, users are going to execute unpredictable queries and direct and managing costs are not a problem I'd definitely go for Redshift. If performance is not so critical and queries will be predictable somewhat I'd go for Athena.
Once you select the technology you'll need to optimize your data in order to get the queries executed as fast as possible. In both cases you may need to adapt the data model to fit your queries better. In the case you go for Athena you'd also proabably need to change your file format to Parquet or Avro and review your partition strategy depending on your most frequent type of query. If you choose Redshift you'll need to ingest the data from your files into it and maybe carry out some tuning tasks for performance gain.
I'll recommend Redshift for now since it can address a wider range of use cases, but we could give you better advice if you described your use case in depth.
It depend of the nature of your data (structured or not?) and of course your queries (ad-hoc or predictible?). For example you can look at partitioning and columnar format to maximize MPP capabilities for both Athena and Redshift
you can change your PSV fomat data to parquet file format with AWS GLUE and then your query performance will be improved
Pros of Amazon Athena
- Use SQL to analyze CSV files16
- Glue crawlers gives easy Data catalogue8
- Cheap7
- Query all my data without running servers 24x76
- No data base servers yay4
- Easy integration with QuickSight3
- Query and analyse CSV,parquet,json files in sql2
- Also glue and athena use same data catalog2
- No configuration required1
- Ad hoc checks on data made easy0