We performed a comparison between AWS Glue and Oracle GoldenGate based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Cloud Data Integration solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Glue is a NoSQL-based data ETL tool that has some advantages over IIS and ISAs."
"AWS Glue is quite better than other tools, but you have to learn it properly before you start using it."
"It is AWS-integrated. There is end-to-end integration with the other AWS services. It is also user-friendly."
"We no longer had to worry much about infrastructure management because AWS Glue is serverless, and Amazon takes care of the underlying infrastructure."
"The solution is serverless so it allows us to transform data while optimizing the cost and performance of Spark jobs."
"I appreciate AWS Glue for its cost-effectiveness."
"I like its integration and ability to handle all data-related tasks."
"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."
"I like that the product transforms data and provides real-time applications."
"I am impressed with the tool's possibility of integrating different systems in a unified place."
"The most valuable feature is data replication capability."
"The CDC feature is interesting."
"What I like most about Oracle GoldenGate is that it supports cross-platform migrations. For example, Oracle GoldenGate could pump data from one type of system to another such as the data from Oracle DB to SQL Db2."
"Oracle GoldenGate features work fine, which is what I like about it. I also like that it's scalable, easy to set up, and has good technical support."
"What I have found the most valuable about GoldenGate is that it does real-time and no-downtime migrations. Its migrations are fast. There are not many tools like it on the marketplace."
"You can put data together from a few databases into one database or the other way, from one database into several. It transforms data in real-time."
"Only people who can code, either in Java or Python, can use the product freely. Those who don't know Java or Python might find using AWS Glue difficult."
"Cost-wise, AWS Glue is expensive, so that's an area for improvement. The process for setting up the solution was also complex, which is another area for improvement."
"There should be more connectors for different databases."
"The monitoring is not that good."
"The solution’s stability could be improved."
"In terms of performance, if they can further optimize the execution time for serverless jobs, it would be a welcome improvement."
"On occasion, the solution's dashboard reports that a project failed due to runtime but it actually succeeded."
"It would be better if it were more user-friendly. The interesting thing we found is that it was a little strange at the beginning. The way Glue works is not very straightforward. After trying different things, for example, we used just the console to create jobs. Then we realized that things were not working as expected. After researching and learning more, we realized that even though the console creates the script for the ETL processes, you need to modify or write your own script in Spark to do everything you want it to do. For example, we are pulling data from our source database and our application database, which is in Aurora. From there, we are doing the ETL to transform the data and write the results into Redshift. But what was surprising is that it's almost like whatever you want to do, you can do it with Glue because you have the option to put together your own script. Even though there are many functionalities and many connections, you have the opportunity to write your own queries to do whatever transformations you need to do. It's a little deceiving that some options are supposed to work in a certain way when you set them up in the console, but then they are not exactly working the right way or not as expected. It would be better if they provided more examples and more documentation on options."
"You cannot put everything in Golden Gate for the license and large models."
"In some cases, expectations were not met, especially when specific tables were expected to be disabled, and changes were anticipated in the target environment. We had to take backups from the source and refresh the address to address this."
"What needs improvement in Oracle GoldenGate is the support. Another feature that needs to be improved in the solution is its GUI. It would be useful for programmers or users to be able to work from the GUI, not just from the command line. Simplifying how Oracle GoldenGate is used would also make the solution better."
"The product lacks some features and it's expensive."
"I would like to see the interface more graphical and easier to use."
"The solution's licensing price is very expensive and could be made more competitive."
"The tool's connections are disconnected at times. The tool needs to integrate other databases."
"Microservices Architecture is not user-friendly."
AWS Glue is ranked 1st in Cloud Data Integration with 37 reviews while Oracle GoldenGate is ranked 6th in Data Integration with 48 reviews. AWS Glue is rated 7.8, while Oracle GoldenGate is rated 8.2. 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 Oracle GoldenGate writes "Performs real-time replication without data loss, but we cannot do much automation". AWS Glue is most compared with AWS Database Migration Service, Informatica PowerCenter, SSIS, Informatica Cloud Data Integration and Talend Open Studio, whereas Oracle GoldenGate is most compared with AWS Database Migration Service, Qlik Replicate, Quest SharePlex, Azure Data Factory and SAP Data Services. See our AWS Glue vs. Oracle GoldenGate 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.