We performed a comparison between LocalDB and Teradata based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Relational Databases Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The most valuable feature of LocalDBis the connection between the application and DB."
"The initial setup was simple."
"The solution is fast."
"The initial setup is very straightforward. The guidelines are very easy to follow. Maintenance is very easy and requires very little manpower."
"It has given our business the ability to gain insights into the data and create data labs for analysis and PoCs."
"Building a data warehouse with Teradata has definitely helped a lot of our downstream applications to more easily access information."
"A conventional and easily defined way to build a data warehouse or a layer of data marts."
"The most valuable features of Teradata are that it is a massively parallel platform and I can receive a lot of data and get the queries out correctly, especially if it's been appropriately designed. The native features make it very suitable for multiple large data tasks in a structured data environment. Additionally, the automation is very good."
"Teradata is a great, industry-leading data warehousing product that has MPP architecture."
"I found all parts --loading, transformation, processing & querying work in parallel, and end-to-end-- to be valuable."
"The solution scales well on the cloud."
"When it comes to integration, tools like Informatica seamlessly connect with Teradata. We ensure the Teradata database is configured correctly in Informatica, including the proper hostname and properties for the load process. We didn't find any major complexity or issues with integration."
"The internal connection features of LocalDB could improve."
"The ALM features can be improved, but the database by itself is reliable."
"The initial setup is complex and requires a skilled person."
"The solution needs to create a management tool. Right now, the solution has tools for creating a local installation, but it's too simplistic. We need something that's a bit more complex so that we can extend the tools with our scripts."
"There is a need to improve performance in high transaction processes, as well as the reporting system."
"Data ingestion is done via external utilities and not by the query language itself. It would be more convenient to have that functionality within its SQL dialect."
"The increasing volumes of data demand more and more performance."
"Apart from Control-M, it would be nice if it could integrate with other tools."
"I think the UI is not there yet. It could be improved by being more user-friendly."
"Teradata should focus on functionality for building predictive models because, in that regard, it can definitely improve."
"Teradata's UI could be more user-friendly."
"Sometimes the large injestion takes days to load data, and some of our stored procedures take two to three days."
LocalDB is ranked 15th in Relational Databases Tools with 5 reviews while Teradata is ranked 7th in Relational Databases Tools with 54 reviews. LocalDB is rated 9.0, while Teradata is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of LocalDB writes "Good for the development process, generally stable, and easy to set up". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Teradata writes "Offers seamless integration capabilities and performance optimization features, including extensive indexing and advanced tuning capabilities". LocalDB is most compared with SQL Server, MySQL, Oracle Database In-Memory, Oracle Database and Infobright DB, whereas Teradata is most compared with SQL Server, Snowflake, Oracle Exadata, MySQL and BigQuery. See our LocalDB vs. Teradata report.
See our list of best Relational Databases Tools vendors.
We monitor all Relational Databases Tools 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.