We performed a comparison between Actian Pervasive Data Integrator [EOL], Oracle Data Integrator (ODI), and webMethods Integration Server based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, Informatica, Oracle and others in Data Integration."There were no concerns with the stability. This product is very good from a stability perspective."
"The most valuable feature of ODI is the to use of the whole ETL to create a data lake."
"The tool improved our data integration workflow primarily due to its compatibility with Oracle. Its integration makes it very convenient for analytics. Its most valuable feature is robust extended capability. The solution's debugging capabilities are good."
"In our DW/BI solution, ODI is the main tool to integrate the data in a daily batch way."
"All our systems can be widely integrated by ODI, such as transactional systems, our data warehouses, and B2B integration."
"Most of the functions are very straightforward, like the data model, mapping, package, and load plan. Thus, a new user could get started very fast."
"I do not have to maintain a separate ETL instance. I can change the SQL when something is not performing correctly."
"The installation of the client ODI Studio is easy."
"The most valuable features of ODI are the knowledge modules, such as the Loading Knowledge module and the Check Knowledge module, they are helpful. We can check for the constraints in ODI. That helps in figuring out what are the constraints that are the primary keys created in the tables. We can check them with the Check Knowledge module."
"It has a good integration server, designer, and a very good API portal."
"It is a bundled product stack for A2A and B2B usage. It is one of the best products which I have used during my integration career."
"We have a reusable code that we can replicate for any new interfaces."
"From a user perspective, the feature which I like the most about Integration Server is its designer."
"Some of the key features are the integration platform, query mechanism, message handling within the bus, and the rules engine. We've had a really good experience with webMethods Integration Server."
"The comprehensiveness and depth of Integration Servers' connectors to packaged apps and custom apps is unlimited. They have a connector for everything. If they don't, you can build it yourself. Or oftentimes, if there is value for other customers as well, you can talk with webMethods about creating a new adapter for you."
"I feel comfortable using this product with its ease of building interfaces for developers. This is a better integration tool for integrating with various applications like Oracle, Salesforce, mainframes, etc. It works fine in the integration of legacy software as well."
"The product supports various types of digital documents, including XMLs and EDI."
"I am not sure if there are various connectors available in the recent version of Pervasive DI to support the wide range of sources available (e.g., big data, cloud, EME)."
"The initial setup is a bit complex compared to other tools."
"Stability could be improved because some operators have issues."
"It needs easier security."
"The price needs to be lowered. It's too expensive."
"At present, when multiple steps are executed in parallel in the load plan and errors occur, the error handling mechanism does not function correctly."
"The solution lacks some functions and features."
"The resource management aspect of the solution could be improved."
"It would be really good if Oracle considered enabling the tool to integrate with some other platforms that are deprecated simply for commercial reasons"
"The price should be reduced to make it more affordable."
"Forced migration from MessageBroker to Universal Messaging requires large scale reimplementation for JMS."
"I'd like to see the admin portal for managing the integration server go up a level, to have more capabilities and to be given a more modern web interface."
"The logging capability has room for improvement. That way, we could keep a history of all the transactions. It would be helpful to be able to get to that without having to build a standalone solution to do so."
"It is quite expensive."
"The solution has big instances when deployed under microservices or in a containerized platform. They need to improve that so that it is competitive with other integration solutions, like Redis and Kafka. Deployments under microservices with those solutions are much more lightweight, in the size of the runtime itself, compared with Software AG."
"The deployment should be simplified."
"There should be better logging, or a better dashboard, to allow you to see see the logs of the services."
More webMethods Integration Server Pricing and Cost Advice →
Earn 20 points