Snowflake Reviews

It is used in my company as well as in my client's company. We are a system integrator, so naturally, we need to have the centers of excellence and competencies in Snowflake.

The way it is built and designed is valuable. The way the shared model is built and the way it exploits the power of the cloud is very good. Certain features related to administration and management, akin to Oracle Flashback and all that, are very important for modern-day administration and management.

It is also good in terms of managing and improving performance, indexing, and partitioning. It is sort of completely automated. Everything is essentially under the hood, and the engine takes care of it all. As a data warehouse on the cloud, Snowflake stands strong on its ground even though each of the cloud providers has its own data warehouse, such as Redshift for AWS or Synapse for Azure.

There are three things that came to my notice. I am not very sure whether they have already done it. The first one is very specific to the virtual data warehouse. Snowflake might want to offer industry-specific models for the data warehouse. Snowflake is a very strong product with credit. For a typical retail industry, such as the pharma industry, if it can get into the functional space as well, it will be a big shot in their arm.

The second thing is related to the migration from other data warehouses to Snowflake. They can make the migration a little bit more seamless and easy. It should be compatible, well-structured, and well-governed. Many enterprises have huge impetus and urgency to move to Snowflake from their existing data warehouse, so, naturally, this is an area that is critical.

The third thing is related to the capability of dealing with relational and dimensional structures. It is not that friendly with relational structures. Snowflake is more friendly with the dimensional structure or the data masks, which is characteristic of a Kimball model. It is very difficult to be savvy and friendly with both structures because these structures are different and address different kinds of needs. One is manipulation-heavy, and the other one is read-heavy or analysis-heavy. One is for heavy or frequent changes and amendments, and the other one is for frequent reads. One is flat, and the other one is distributed. There are fundamental differences between these two structures. If I were to consider Snowflake as a silver bullet, it should be equally savvy on both ends, which I don't think is the case. Maybe the product has grown and scaled up from where it was.

I have been using this solution for close to three years. I kept a tab on Snowflake and its progress since it came into the market.

Personally, I have worked extensively with Oracle, SQL Server, and Teradata. SQL Server has the Fast Track Data Warehouse (FTDW) appliance. Oracle has both the database and the appliance. I haven't worked on Parallel Data Warehouse, which is a big one offered by Oracle. Teradata is an appliance in itself. There is also Metadata. I haven't worked on DB2. 

All of these had their own lacunae. Data warehouses had their own problems. There were failures, challenges, and difficulties in adoption, and all of these have been addressed by Snowflake a big way. It has tried to marry the best of both worlds in terms of turnaround time, scalability, adoption, and seamlessness.

I hail from a classical data warehouse background. Snowflake has been kind of a silver bullet. It is trying to meet the best of both worlds. I wish I could do much more on Snowflake, but I'm tied up with many other things, which is why I'm not able to concentrate that much, but it is an exceptionally good technology.

Its initial setup is very simple, which is its plus point. It is not at all a problem. You only need to understand a bit of the cloud ecosystem. When Snowflake is on Azure or AWS, you need to understand

• What exactly is happening?
• How these two are handshaking with each other?
• What part Snowflake is playing?
• How Azure or AWS is complementing it?

If these things are clear, the rest shouldn't be a problem.

This could be something that might be debated upon, but Snowflake has two parts to it. One is the data warehouse itself, and the other one is the cloud. It is important to know about the cloud in terms of:

• How a cloud functions?
• How a cloud orchestrates through its services, domains, invocation of services, and other things?
• How a cloud is laid out?

For example, let's take AWS. If AWS is invoking Lambda or something else, how will S3 come into the picture? Is there a role of DynamoDB? If you're using DynamoDB, how would you use it in the Snowflake landscape? So, cloud nuances are involved when we speak of Snowflake, and there is no doubt about that, but a more important area on which Snowflake consultants need to focus on is the core data warehousing and BI principles. This is where I feel the genesis of Snowflake has happened. It is the data warehouse on the cloud, and it addresses the challenges that on-prem databases had in the past, such as scalability, turnaround times, reusability, adoption, and cost, but the genesis, principles, and tenets of data warehousing are still sacrosanct and hold good. Therefore, you need the knowledge or background of what a data warehouse is expected to be, be it any school of thought such as Inmon school, a Kimball school, or a mix. You should know:

• Data warehouse as a discipline.
• The reason why it was born.
• The expectations out of it in the past.
• The current expectations.
• What being on the cloud would solve?

These things on the data warehouse side need to be crystal clear. The cloud part is important, but it is of lesser essence than the data warehouse part. That's what I see, personally, and I guess that's the way the Snowflake founders have built the product.

As a data warehouse, I would rate Snowflake an eight out of ten.

I am a solutions architect for Snowflake.

The Time Travel feature is helpful for accessing historical data and the ability to clone external tables is useful.

I would like to see more transparency in data processing, ATLs, and compute areas - which should give more comfort to the end-users. 

Improvement to the end-to-end process of loading data into Snowflake could be made as well.

The product is stable so far.

The product is scalable enough.

The initial setup is not complex.

I believe that pricing is reasonable for this solution.

Snowflake is easy for business users to implement, allowing them to start small and grow big.

I think people are still debating on whether they should still continue with S3 and add Snowflake or, whether they should take away S3 and completely rely on Snowflake.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

We use Snowflake for data warehouse modeling and reports.

Once you have finished your designs they can be easily imported to Snowflake and the information can be readily accessed without an IT expert.

The documentation could improve. They should provide architecture information.

There could be better integration with tools other than the common databases used to receive data. There are other tools that have ETL tools within, such as Tableau. You are able to work with information prior to sending it to Tableau. This feature would be nice to have in a tool from Snowflake.

In a future release, they should make it easier to do reporting. A drag and drop type feature would be good. If not a drag and drop feature, there should be some other easier way to do it than it is now.

I have been using Snowflake for approximately six months.

The experience that we have had until now is that we can use the Snowflake very well from the videos on the web. The knowledge that our company already has regarding this solution has helped. We are producing some very sophisticated solutions. There is plenty of material on the web that you would be able to have lessons and learn.

We have worked a lot with Tableau previously.

We deploy the solution on-premises because we are developers, the customer is the one who has it on the Cloud. We helped them with the on-premises deployment and then we install the software and we deployed our solutions made on-premises. We complete any changes that need to be done in order to work in the customer's landscape.

The time of the deployment depends on the solution the customer requires. If it's a small solution, typically it will take approximately two weeks. A medium solution, that takes from two weeks to eight weeks.  However, it depends on what you are trying to accomplish with the solution. If you are trying to do a very complex data warehouse, it's not the tool that times the most time, it's the analysis and design that takes the most time for deployment. Once that you have the analysis, design, and you transport them to Snowflake this is not difficult.

In any BI solution, you have a lot of changes because of what you need to do with the end-users, there are a lot of changes to the end-user. This can also take up some time for the deployment for the first time. It can take two to six weeks for a medium-sized project.

On average a small project can take three people. That's in small BI projects, in some customers that we have the project takes a maximum of six weeks in order to have all the data fields. This is not for a whole data warehouse but for sales and customers. Those are all small to medium-sized projects, that require three people maximum for deployment. You might always want to have in addition, an analyst and the senior architect. 

Most of our team are technicians.

Snowflake has a lot of capabilities and performance. However, the tool is not a silver bullet and can do everything. If you designed what you need according to the tool, then everything is going to be okay.

This is true for any tool. Many people start the projects without validating what they are going to expect to have at the end, they receive a big surprise. They were thinking that the tool has this capability and it doesn't have it or perhaps it has the capability but the design you have does not work correctly.

If you see the percentage of projects in the different customers in many places, such as in Mexico, Florida, and Miami. Snowflake is a tool that is currently being used but has not been in the past. There is not a lot of history.

I rate Snowflake a six out of ten.

We have not used Snowflake long enough to better rate it. If we had a lot more formal education or had more information or reference manuals our experience would be better.

I have used it in my previous company. It was just a SQL server data warehouse using reporting tools on top of it. It was an on-premise SQL server environment, and it was a typical data warehouse use case, but we wanted to do things faster and more cost-effectively. 

We used it to modernize our data warehouse. We didn't want to invest more in on-premise servers, and we were looking for a way to quickly get more data joined together. 

It had definitely improved the way our organization functioned at the time.

The overall ecosystem was easy to manage. Given that we weren't a very highly technical group, it was preferable to other things we looked at because it could do all of the cloud tunings. It can tune your data warehouse to an appropriate size for controlled billing, resume and sleep functions, and all such things. It was much more simple than doing native Azure or AWS development. 

It was stable, and their support was also perfect. It was also very easy to deploy. It was one of those rare times where they did exactly what they said they could do.

Their strategy is just to leverage what you've got and put Snowflake in the middle. It does work well with other tools. You have to buy a separate reporting tool and a separate data loading tool, whereas, in some platforms, these tools are baked in. In the long-term, they'll need to add more direct partnerships to the ecosystem so that it's not like adding on tools around Snowflake to make it work. They can also consider including Snowflake native reporting tools versus partnering with other reporting tools. It would kind of change where they sit in the market.

I have been using this solution for about three years.

We didn't run into anything. We had outages for a couple of seconds, but they were related to Amazon or AWS. They weren't related to Snowflake.

We scaled it a little bit. We didn't have a lot of data to scale, as a lot of companies do. We only had a couple of terabytes of data, which is insignificant for a cloud platform. 

The development team had three or four people getting data in. Then report people were also using the platform, but they didn't really have to know that it was Snowflake because they were going at it through a reporting tool. There were probably 30 or 40 people writing queries against our reporting tools, which were, in turn, using Snowflake.

They were really good. They were very responsive. There were never any issues with them. I would give them a ten out of ten.

I've used a lot of different data warehousing solutions at different companies.

It was easy as pie. In a couple of hours, it was up and running, and we were loading the data in. We had a fairly senior developer for that. He knew SQL server and queries very well. If you're used to developing in any type of SQL environment, you can jump in and use Snowflake really quickly.

It is per credit. It has a use-it-as-you-go model. We bought a chunk of 20,000 credits, and they were lasting us for at least a year. We didn't have the scale of data like a much larger company to consume more credits. For us, it was very inexpensive.

Their strategy is just to leverage what you've got and put Snowflake in the middle. It doesn't make it expensive because most of the organizations already have reporting tools. Now, if you were starting from scratch, it might be cheaper to go a different way.

If time to value is your primary goal, then I would recommend going for Snowflake over one of the other cloud providers.

I would rate Snowflake a ten out of ten. It is one of the few products in which everything demos well. It actually did everything they showed in the demos. We really couldn't find any gotchas in it. It kind of delivered as promised.

The primary use case for Snowflake is in our data warehouse project. We have a private DW and whoever has the credentials can access it. I am a data integration developer and we are using ETL tools to extract the data from different source systems and then load it in the data warehouse.

Snowflake is the latest technology. It has great flexibility whenever we are loading data and performs ELT (extract, load, transform) techniques instead of ETL.

This solution automatically performs micro-partitioning when the data is loaded. This creates a dynamic partition and based on the cluster, the performance is fast and really impressive.

Snowflake is using MPP, massively parallel processing techniques, which is a great feature. It saves developers time and allows us to focus more on client requirements.

It is difficult in some cases to perform ETL and this is something that should be included. As it is now, I use Informatica PowerCenter to load data from on-premises to the Snowflake cloud-based data warehouse. If this could be done by Snowflake directly, without an external integration tool, then it would become a full package. It would be awesome.

They do have a native connector to connect with integration tools for loading data, but it would be much better to have the functionality built-in. We would like to be able to just write an SQL query and do our work.

I have been working with Snowflake for six months.

We have not had any major issues with stability.

Snowflake does not require manual scaling because it does it for you. Developers just need to load the data and process the query. That's it. The developer's job is not to spend time improving performance, as it was with an on-premises solution. We had to do the partitioning, collect the stats, and everything else. In the case of this cloud-based solution, it doesn't require as much work. Instead, we can focus on the queries.

We are planning to increase our usage of Snowflake.

I have been in contact with technical support many times and it was awesome. I got great support. Whenever I needed anything they were ready to help me out, which was nice.

I have experience with Informatica PowerCenter and Oracle. PowerCenter uses ETL techniques instead of ELT. Oracle does not automatically perform micro-partitioning. Instead, you have to partition manually and it is a static partition.

Prior to Snowflake, I was using an on-premises data warehouse. Snowflake is the first experience I have had with a cloud-based data warehouse. It is an awesome tool.

There is no need to install this software, which is the best part. It doesn't require any maintenance, and although DBA support is required, it is much less compared to an on-premises solution. This type of cloud-based solution has no requirement for software, hardware, or maintenance because everything is managed by Snowflake's system.

The only assistance I had during the setup was from the integration tool, Informatica PowerCenter. This was used to export our on-premises data from Oracle and import it to Snowflake on the cloud.

You pay based on the data that you are storing in the data warehouse and there are no maintenance costs.

This is an awesome tool, but there is room for improvement in terms of integration. Also, in terms of management, nothing is perfect and everything can be improved.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

We needed a data warehouse and we made a decision on what is the right tool for us as a data warehousing tool by comparing products. We looked into Microsoft Azure, Red Shift and Snowflake. In the end, we decided on Snowflake because it looks more up to date, it seemed much better purposed as a data cloud solution.

It was developed from scratch and dedicated to being used on the cloud and that was what we were looking for. It was not just an on-premises system which was then converted to use on the cloud. It was completely developed from scratch and purely focus on the cloud.

Because it was programmed with that dedication, it has some significant advantages.

The thing I find most valuable is that scalability, space storage, and computing power is separate. When you scale up, it is live from one second to the next — constantly available as you scale — so there is no downtime or interruption of services.

It has something like a time machine, as it is from Apple it incorporates that feature in a way similar to their operating system. So whenever you need a version of the data to test with, you can just go back and take a copy of what was backed up yesterday. It makes some things very easy. It backs up your data warehouses, so for example in our case, a colleague deleted a complete database and we just need to do an undrop on the database and the data was there again.

This helps you to have a development environment with current data. You can just clone your production environment and you have a development environment. Everything you do you can test it on real production data without destroying the production data itself.

These are significant advantages.

The company is constantly working to improve the product. Now they have a focus on data sharing, which is really great. We already share data with others who do not have Snowflake. That alone is already great. But if the other counterparts also have Snowflake, then it is extremely easy to share data. You can control access at low levels and even on the cell level. It is very secure.

With the improvements they continue to make, there is nothing now that I would say I miss or features that need to be added. Maybe there could be some more connectors to other systems, but this is what they are constantly developing anyway.

We have been using this product for two years.

The product is very stable. We never had an issue with stability. It is reliable and it is extremely fast. For example, we had a stock procedure that took half an hour to complete on our SQL cluster, and in Snowflake it was running in two minutes. So that is a significant time savings for just one task.

The number of people at our company currently using the solution depends on what we are trying to accomplish. We have four developers in Snowflake and then we also have users who are leaving data with us for our further analysis. That may be around ten other users.

With the growing data set we have and the increase in the size of our business, we will increase the use of Snowflake, but not with respect to the number of users. We are a small company and all the users who need to use it are already using it. We have more data that we need to load and which we want to integrate before we will make more usage of Snowflake.

There is nothing for us to complain about when it comes to technical support. The response time is really great. Whenever we have an issue there is some delay because they are in San Francisco in the United States so there is a time difference. But when we raise an issue, we get answers immediately. We may not get the solution immediately, as that is not always possible. But we get some type of immediate response and days later we have a solution. The tech support is quite responsive.

We use several products together for our framework. We have our data warehouse which is in Snowflake, we use Domo for standard reporting and we use R for data science analysis.

Before we had Snowflake we had a different solution. We switched to Snowflake because we felt the need to modernize our data warehouse architecture. We were also thinking about having other solutions in the cloud to reduce administration costs. With no effort on our part, we could have a stronger system compared to the effort and cost of doing a similar thing on-premises. This was the biggest advantage of Snowflake. We really do not need to have those administrative efforts anymore. Now we don't take care about when we run out of storage or that we need to buy better CPUs because if we need more computing power, we don't worry about it, we just use it and it is there.

The setup for the product was straightforward. For us, it was a little bit of a challenge because when we implemented the data warehouse, we also changed the architectural concept and we implemented a better framework. Because this framework was new to us it complicated our installation. But Snowflake itself, if you want to use and you have a data warehouse already in place with the right framework, then it is straightforward. You just store your data in and that's it. What you use on top is material for orchestrating all the load jobs. But this is other integrations and other choices that are really outside Snowflake itself.

The initial deployment from purchase until it was up and running in production took two months.

We had a consulting company help us for the initial two months of the setup and then afterward we did everything by ourselves. We were quite satisfied working with the consultants and they helped us to implement quickly. We mainly needed them because we implemented this metadata framework. In the beginning, we had this consultancy for analyzing our platform, which to select and which tools should be used. After we completed this initial portion of the project over the two months, we needed them mainly for completing the implementation of the metadata framework.

Snowflake itself is easy to learn. If you know SQL it is really not very hard. Everything is well documented and it is not a problem.

The whole licensing system is based on credit points. That means you commit to using it and you pay for what you use. You can also make a license agreement with the company so that you buy credit points and then you use them. So if you buy credit points that you think will last you for a year, you pay a certain amount of money and then you have these credit points available. What you do not use in one year can be carried over to the next year and it is that easy. The advantage of buying more is that you get a discount when you buy a bigger package with more credits.

There is not really much advice I can give people considering this solution except that they should use it and enjoy it. It really sounds simple but that is it. Of course, you need to be careful with the usage of your credit points. Because there are so many possibilities in configuring the way you build your data warehouse or infrastructure, the data warehouse might seem logical, but it is not the best with respect to using credit points. You need to be careful about this. It probably takes half-a-year experience and then you will know how to do it. If you don't know what you are doing, Snowflake also helps to optimize your usage so that you do don't use too many credits points. After one year, we realized we had spent a huge number of credit points and we talked to Snowfake and then they came to us and we analyzed our systems together and we optimized the usage.

On a scale from one to ten where ten is the best, I would rate Snowflake as at least nine. Why not a ten is only because maybe there is something better on the market which is a ten that I don't know about. For me, it is already a ten.

Our aim was to migrate everything from on-premise, so we just migrated as it is and then we had issues. Some use cases that were running on-premises were not installed. We just went through each case and then finalized the issues with some of the packages that were not working or some users that were not getting what they were expecting. We did deep analysis on each and every case and then looked for options in Snowflake and are now working with the team to move everything over to Snowflake. 

The data warehouse is one of the great concepts of Snowflake. The coding plans are also a great feature. You can switch out the values or sizes. 

It would be helpful if implementation could be handled more on the user-side. We need to train the users on best practices and how to use the solution properly. It's a cost issue. If they don't run it properly then it'll end up costing more money.

There are some stored procedures that we've had trouble with. The solution also needs to fine-tune the connectors to be able to connect into the system source.

The solution is stable. We had only one failure, but that was because of AWS issues. Beyond that, I haven't seen anything else. From the Snowflake side, within 10 minutes they reported the AWS issue. It was under two hours of downtime because of the quick response.

As long as you don't need to worry about storage or cost, this solution would be one of the best ones on the market for scalability purposes. We've migrated about 400-450 dealers onto the solution so far. We do intend to expand usage so there will be more users and more data. The drawbacks we've had with on-premises was space being a constraint and the user code having limitations.

Customer support is good. There is always someone who's going to respond. They will let you know what can be done and what is possible.

We did some testing and some comparisons, but it's all set up now and running fine. The deployment took about three months. Since we didn't want to disrupt the on-premises, or overload the system, we did most of the migrations on the weekend.

For maintenance, in the beginning, until you are through with training and performance tuning, you will need more people. You might need to start with seven or so, and then, for ongoing work, probably one or two people can manage it. 

We had a Snowflake consultant on-site that assisted us with the implementation.

It's an expensive solution. We can't predict exactly how much until we've streamlined everything and the user requirements have been completed, but normally they charge on the storage, which depends upon the average storage amount used for the month.

We looked at IBM because it also has on-premise solutions. We also looked at Azure as well as AWS.

Because most of the issues you come across can be dealt with on the user's sites, it's important to educate the users and understand their requirements.

The best advice I can give is to understand the product and to try to stick to what is required. From the business side, you need to monitor usage and monitor the space because of on-premises constraints. If it gets filled up then you will have to react. However, this solution is very scalable. 

I would rate this solution between seven and eight out of ten. The solution still has some constraints that need to be addressed.

We're running a POC to test scalability, performance, on-demand resource management, workload management, et cetera. The security aspect will also be important for us.

The product offers a lot of great features.

Architectural-wise, it's got great architecture. That's what we are looking for. It's kind of decoupled from storage and has virtual warehouses. We like that we can travel and keep things virtual. For us, the virtual warehousing is likely the most valuable aspect. You can spin up as many virtual warehouses that you want. That's quite useful as a feature.

I haven't found that the solution is lacking any features. It's quite complete.

I would like to see a client version of the GUI. Right now, it is a web GUI, which has stored the SQL, the worksheets. We are asking for that from Snowflake. We'd like to understand how can we save these worksheets on our local desktop. That is not there at this point.

I've been using the solution for about the past year as part of a POC.

In the past, we've used an SQL server. On the cloud side of it, we do have some experience. Snowflake, however, is the new data warehouse solution that we are looking into it.

If necessary, we may have to get into Synapse, and do a kind of a pilot project with that as well. We may evaluate them both to see which is better. We are not there yet. We are just working on Snowflake.

We are a direct customer and end-user.

We've been using the solution during a POC for the last year or so. It's a pilot project to test its feasibility for our company. We're just starting to get performance stats and stuff like that.

I'm not sure which version of the solution we are currently using. I don't recall the exact version number. Usually, people are running the latest version. Whatever the latest available option is is likely the number we are on.

I'd rate the solution at an eight out of ten. We're still in the POC phase, however, based on what we have seen, we are quite satisfied.