We performed a comparison between AWS Glue and Confluent based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: Of the two solutions, users like the integration capabilities of Confluent. In addition, users appreciate that there is an open source version of Confluent and also mention an ROI. For these reasons, Confluent wins out in this comparison.
"The solution's technical support is good. Whenever we raise a use case where we face an issue in our company, we get a response from the solution's technical team."
"We have found it beneficial when moving data from one source to another."
"The most valuable feature for me is the visual interface of AWS Glue."
"I also like that you can add custom libraries like JAR files and use them. So, the ability to use a fast processing engine and embed basic jobs easily are significant advantages."
"The solution is serverless so it allows us to transform data while optimizing the cost and performance of Spark jobs."
"It's fairly straightforward as a product; it's not very complicated."
"The solution is highly user-friendly, and its features are easy to use. The new addition of AWS Glue Data Catalog is also very beneficial, making the tool even more helpful for its users."
"I like the fact that AWS Glue works with Python scripts."
"Implementing Confluent's schema registry has significantly enhanced our organization's data quality assurance."
"Their tech support is amazing; they are very good, both on and off-site."
"It is also good for knowledge base management."
"The monitoring module is impressive."
"The solution can handle a high volume of data because it works and scales well."
"I would rate the scalability of the solution at eight out of ten. We have 20 people who use Confluent in our organization now, and we hope to increase usage in the future."
"The most valuable feature that we are using is the data replication between the data centers allowing us to configure a disaster recovery or software. However, is it's not mandatory to use and because most of the features that we use are from Apache Kafka, such as end-to-end encryption. Internally, we can develop our own kind of product or service from Apache Kafka."
"Kafka Connect framework is valuable for connecting to the various source systems where code doesn't need to be written."
"In terms of improvement, the performance of AWS Glue could be faster."
"One area that could be improved is the ETL view. The drag-and-drop interface is not as user-friendly as some other ETL tools."
"We face performance issues when using AWS Glue for data transformation and integration."
"The monitoring is not that good."
"It is not clear how the partition discovery would have been affected by more data coming in."
"There is a learning curve to this tool."
"In terms of performance, if they can further optimize the execution time for serverless jobs, it would be a welcome improvement."
"The solution's visual ETL tool is of no use for actual implementation."
"Currently, in the early stages, I see a gap on the security side. If you are using the SaaS version, we would like to get a fuller, more secure solution that can be adopted right out of the box. Confluence could do a better job sharing best practices or a reusable pattern that others have used, especially for companies that can not afford to hire professional services from Confluent."
"It could have more themes. They should also have more reporting-oriented plugins as well. It would be great to have free custom reports that can be dispatched directly from Jira."
"The product should integrate tools for incorporating diagrams like Lucidchart. It also needs to improve its formatting features. We also faced issues while granting permissions."
"The pricing model should include the ability to pick features and be charged for them only."
"It could have more integration with different platforms."
"Confluent's price needs improvement."
"It could be improved by including a feature that automatically creates a new topic and puts failed messages."
"The Schema Registry service could be improved. I would like a bigger knowledge base of other use cases and more technical forums. It would be good to have more flexible monitoring features added to the next release as well."
AWS Glue is ranked 1st in Cloud Data Integration with 37 reviews while Confluent is ranked 4th in Streaming Analytics with 19 reviews. AWS Glue is rated 7.8, while Confluent is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of AWS Glue writes "Provides serverless mechanism, easy data transformation and automated infrastructure management". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Confluent writes "Has good technical support services and a valuable feature for real-time data streaming ". AWS Glue is most compared with AWS Database Migration Service, Informatica PowerCenter, SSIS, Informatica Cloud Data Integration and Oracle Data Integrator (ODI), whereas Confluent is most compared with Amazon MSK, Amazon Kinesis, Databricks, Oracle GoldenGate and Fivetran. See our AWS Glue vs. Confluent report.
See our list of best Cloud Data Integration vendors.
We monitor all Cloud Data Integration reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
