Need advice about which tool to choose?Ask the StackShare community!
AWS Glue vs Google Cloud Dataflow: What are the differences?
AWS Glue and Google Cloud Dataflow are both cloud-based services for processing and transforming big data. However, there are several key differences between these two platforms.
Data Processing Model: AWS Glue uses an extract, transform, load (ETL) approach, making it ideal for batch processing and data warehousing. On the other hand, Google Cloud Dataflow employs a dataflow programming model, enabling both batch and stream processing.
Language Support: AWS Glue supports Python and Scala, allowing users to write custom transformations and extract data from a variety of sources. In contrast, Google Cloud Dataflow provides native support for Java, Python, and other popular programming languages.
Managed Service: AWS Glue is a fully managed service, which means that AWS takes care of infrastructure provisioning and maintenance. In contrast, Google Cloud Dataflow requires users to manage cluster resources, providing more control but also requiring more setup and management effort.
Data Source Integration: AWS Glue integrates seamlessly with other AWS services like Amazon S3, Amazon RDS, and more. Google Cloud Dataflow offers native integration with Google Cloud Storage, BigQuery, and various other Google Cloud services.
Performance and Scalability: Google Cloud Dataflow leverages the power of Google's infrastructure, enabling high scalability and improved performance for processing large datasets. AWS Glue also offers good performance, but it may not match the scale of Google Cloud Dataflow for extremely large workloads.
Pricing Model: AWS Glue pricing is based on data processing and storage usage, with separate costs for crawlers, jobs, and development endpoints. Google Cloud Dataflow pricing is based on the total number of processing units (vCPU + memory) used for data processing.
In summary, AWS Glue is suited for ETL and data warehousing use cases with its managed service and AWS integration, while Google Cloud Dataflow is more versatile with its support for both batch and stream processing, as well as its scalability and performance capabilities.
We need to perform ETL from several databases into a data warehouse or data lake. We want to
- keep raw and transformed data available to users to draft their own queries efficiently
- give users the ability to give custom permissions and SSO
- move between open-source on-premises development and cloud-based production environments
We want to use inexpensive Amazon EC2 instances only on medium-sized data set 16GB to 32GB feeding into Tableau Server or PowerBI for reporting and data analysis purposes.
You could also use AWS Lambda and use Cloudwatch event schedule if you know when the function should be triggered. The benefit is that you could use any language and use the respective database client.
But if you orchestrate ETLs then it makes sense to use Apache Airflow. This requires Python knowledge.
Though we have always built something custom, Apache airflow (https://airflow.apache.org/) stood out as a key contender/alternative when it comes to open sources. On the commercial offering, Amazon Redshift combined with Amazon Kinesis (for complex manipulations) is great for BI, though Redshift as such is expensive.
You may want to look into a Data Virtualization product called Conduit. It connects to disparate data sources in AWS, on prem, Azure, GCP, and exposes them as a single unified Spark SQL view to PowerBI (direct query) or Tableau. Allows auto query and caching policies to enhance query speeds and experience. Has a GPU query engine and optimized Spark for fallback. Can be deployed on your AWS VM or on prem, scales up and out. Sounds like the ideal solution to your needs.
I have to collect different data from multiple sources and store them in a single cloud location. Then perform cleaning and transforming using PySpark, and push the end results to other applications like reporting tools, etc. What would be the best solution? I can only think of Azure Data Factory + Databricks. Are there any alternatives to #AWS services + Databricks?
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 AWS Glue
- Managed Hive Metastore9
Pros of Google Cloud Dataflow
- Unified batch and stream processing7
- Autoscaling5
- Fully managed4
- Throughput Transparency3