The pricing model should be more transparent and available online. When you start programming, you define the fields, variables, activities, and components but don't know the implication on price. You get a general idea but the more activities you add, the more you pay. It would be better to know price implications up front. 

There is a calculator you can run to simulate price but it doesn't help a lot. Practically speaking, you have to build your job and run it to see the exact price implications. This is an issue because you might realize you are paying too much so you have to reprogram or change things. 

The solution can be improved by decreasing the warmup time which currently can take up to five minutes.

Azure Data Factory could benefit from improvements in its monitoring capabilities to provide a more robust feature set. Enhancing the ease of deployment to higher environments within Azure DevOps would be beneficial, as the current process often requires extensive scripting and pipeline development. It is also known for the flexibility of the data flow feature, particularly in supporting more dynamic data-driven architectures. These enhancements would contribute to a more seamless and efficient workflow within GitLab.

A room for improvement in Azure Data Factory is its speed. Parallelization also needs improvement. As for the rest of the features of Azure Data Factory, I'm happy.

I cannot suggest an additional feature I'd like to see in Azure Data Factory in the future because some of the features aren't available internally because the features undergo security evaluation first, and my organization controls which features would become available to users.

The only challenge with Azure Data Factory is its exception-handling mechanism. When the record fails, it's tough to identify and log.

Integration with other tools, such as SAP, could be enhanced. It still has challenges when we talk about different types of structured and non-structured datages. Azure Data Factory has data ingestion issues. There are no delays out of the box. We needed a lot of tools to make the ingestion happen because of the data structure and size of the data.

The transformation we needed to do on data was also not so easy. It was also a long process. We had a bit more capabilities for setting up the Data Catalog, but it still didn't solve the problem from the data ingestion.

Some known bugs and issues with Azure Data Factory could be rectified.

I find that Azure Data Factory is still maturing, so there are issues. For example, there are many features missing that you can find in other products.

You cannot use a custom data delimiter, which means that you have problems receiving data in certain formats. For example, there are problems dealing with data that is comma-delimited.

Azure Data Factory can improve the transformation features. You have to do a lot of transformation activities. This is something that is just not fully covered. Additionally, the integration could improve for other tools, such as Azure Data Catalog.

What's missing in Azure Data Factory is an Oracle connector. If you want to connect directly to the Oracle database, you must copy and transform the data. There's no Oracle connector if you want to do transformation using data flow activity, so Azure Data Factory needs more connectors for data flow transformation.

Sending out emails after a job is completed is another area for improvement in the tool.

The list of issues and gaps in this tool is extensive, although as time goes on, it gets shorter. It currently includes:

1) Missing email/SMTP activity

2) Mapping data flows requires significant lag time to spin up spark clusters

3) Performance compared to SSIS. Expect copy activity to take ten times that of what SSIS takes for simple data flow between tables in the same database

4) It is missing the debug of a single activity. The workaround is setting a breakpoint on the task and doing a "rerun from activity" or setting debug on activity and running up to that point

5) OAuth 2.0 adapters lack automated support for refresh tokens

6) Copy activity errors provide no guidance as to which column is causing a failure

7) There's no built-in pipeline exit activity when encountering an error

8) Auto Resolve Integration runtime should never pick a region that you're not using (should be your default for your tenant)

9) IR (integration runtime) queue time lag. For example, a small table copy activity I just ran took 95 seconds of queuing and 12 seconds to actually copy the data. Often the queuing time greatly exceeds the actual runtime

10) Activity dependencies are always AND (OR not supported). This is a significant missing capability that forces unnecessary complex workarounds just to handle OR situations when they could just enhance the dependency to support OR like SSIS does. Did I just ask when ADF will be as good as SSIS?  

They need to fix bugs. For example:

1) The debug sometimes stops picking up saved changes for a period of time, rendering this essential tool useless during that time

2) Enable interactive authoring (a critical tool for development) often doesn't turn on when enabled without going into another part of the tool to enable it. Then, you have to wait several minutes before it's enabled which is time you're blocked from development until it's ready.  And then it only activates for up to 120 minutes before you have to go through this all over again. I think Microsoft is trying to torture developers

3) Exiting the inside of an activity that contains other activities always causes the screen to jump to the beginning of a pipeline requiring re-navigating where you were at (greatly slowing development productivity)

4) Auto Resolve Integration runtime (using default settings) often picks remote regions (not necessarily even paired regions!) to operate, which causes either an unnecessary slowdown or an error message saying it's unable to transfer the volume of data across regions

5) Copy activity often gets the error "mapping source is empty" for no apparent reason. If you play with the activity such as importing new metadata then it's happy again. This sort of thing makes you want to just change careers. Or tools. 

They introduced the concept of Flowlets, but it has bugs. Flowlets are a reusable component that allows you to create data-flows. We can configure a Flowlet as a reusable pipeline and plug it inside different data-flows, so we don't have to rewrite our code or visual transformation.

If we make any changes in our data-flow, it reverts all our changes to the original state of the Flowlet. It does not retain changes, and we must reconfigure the Flowlets repeatedly. We had these issues three months ago so things might have changed. It works fine whenever we plug it in and configure it in our data-flow, but if we make minor changes to it, the Flowlet needs to be reconfigured again and loses the configuration.

The documentation could be improved. They require more detailed error reporting, data normalization tools, easier connectivity to other services, more data services, and greater compatibility with other commonly used schemas.

I would like to see a better understanding of other common schemas, as well as a simplification of some of the more complex data normalization and standardization issues.

It would be helpful to have visibility, or better debugging, and see parts of the process as they cycle through, to get a better sense of what is and isn't working.

It's essentially just a black box. There is some monitoring that can be done, but when something goes wrong, even simple fixes are difficult to troubleshoot.

Data Factory could be improved by eliminating the need for a physical data area. We have to extract data using Data Factory, then create a staging database for it with Azure SQL, which is very, very expensive. Another improvement would be lowering the licensing cost. 

There aren't many third-party extensions or plugins available in the solution. Adjunction or addition of third-party extensions or plugins to Azure Data Factory can be a great improvement in the tool. Creation of custom codes, custom extensions, or third-party extensions, like Lookup extension, should be made possible in the tool.

I am unsure if Azure Data Factory bridges the gap between on-premises, cloud, and hybrid solutions. I would like to see a version that would work equally well in both on-premises and cloud environments. I would like to see the aforementioned offerings made to customers as valuable alternatives to the old SSIS tool.

Microsoft is constantly upgrading its product. Changes can happen every week. Every time you open Data Factory you see something new and need to study what it is. I would like to be informed about the changes ahead of time, so we are aware of what's coming.

In future releases, I would like to see Azure Data Factory simplify how the information of logs is presented. Currently, you need to do a lot of clicks and go through steps to find out what happened. It takes too much time. The log needs to be more user-friendly.

Azure Data Factory is a bit complicated compared to Informatica. There are a lot of connectors that are missing and there are a lot of instances where I need to create a server and install Integration Runtime.

The support and the documentation can be improved.

There are a lot of tasks that you need to write code for.

When working with AWS, we have noticed that the difference between ADF and AWS is that AWS is more customer-focused. They're more responsive compared to any other company. ADF is not as good as AWS, but it should be. If AWS is ten out of ten, ADF is around eight out of ten. I think AWS is easier to understand from the GUI perspective compared to ADF.

We require Azure Data Factory to be able to connect to Google Analytics.

Implementing a standard pricing model at a more affordable rate could make it accessible to a larger number of companies. Currently, smaller businesses face a disadvantage in terms of pricing, and reducing costs could address this issue.

Currently, our company requires a monitoring tool, and that isn't available in Azure Data Factory. Although the platform displays which pipelines are running, it doesn't offer a monitoring tool that allows for the sequential execution of pipelines and the ability to visualize end-to-end data flow. As such, this feature is currently missing from the platform.

Occasionally, there are problems within Microsoft itself that impact the Data Factory and cause it to fail.

The product's technical support has certain shortcomings, making it an area where improvements are required. Instead of sending out documents, I think the tool's support team should focus on how to troubleshoot issues. I want the tool's support team to have real-time interaction with users.

The product's price can be problematic for small businesses, making it an area where improvements are required.

Sometimes when I run some jobs, I have issues with the log flow. I want to see where the data goes. I want to see the data stream.

I'd like more integrations with other APIs. Sometimes I need to do some coding, and I'd like to avoid that. I'd like no-code integrations. 

Data Factory would be improved if it were a little more configuration-oriented and not so code-oriented and if it had more automated features.

DataStage is easier to learn than Data Factory because it's more visual. Data Factory has some drag-and-drop options, but it's not as intuitive as DataStage. It would be better if they added more drag-and-drop features. You can start using DataStage without knowing the code. You don't need to learn how the code works before using the solution.

I think the communication about the ADA's would be interesting to see in the platform. How to interact with those kind of information and use it on your pipelines.

I couldn't quite grasp it at first because it has a Microsoft footprint on it. Some of the nomenclature around sync and other things is based on how SSRS or SSIS works, which works fine if you know these products. I didn't know them. So, some of the language and some of the settings were obtuse for me to use. It could be a little difficult if you're coming from the Java or AWS platform, but if you are coming from a Microsoft background, it would be very familiar.

For some of the data, there were some issues with data mapping. Some of the error messages were a little bit foggy. There could be more of a quick start guide or some inline examples. The documentation could be better.

There were some latency and performance issues. The processing time took slightly longer than I was hoping for. I wasn't sure if that was a licensing issue or construction of how we did the product. It wasn't super clear to me why and how those occurred. There was think time between steps. I am not sure if they can reduce the latency there. 

The performance could be better. It would be better if Azure Data Factory could handle a higher load. I have heard that it can get overloaded, and it can't handle it.

Azure Data Factory's pricing in terms of utilization could be improved. Our customers complain that the solution's bills keep growing.

Areas for improvement in Azure Data Factory include connectivity and integration.

When you use integration runtime, whenever there's a failure, the backup process in Azure Data Factory takes time, so this is another area for improvement.

Database support in the solution also has room for improvement because Azure Data Factory only currently supports MS SQL and Postgres. I want to see it supporting other databases.

If you want to connect the solution from on-premises to the cloud, you will have to go with a VPN or a pretty expensive route connection. A VPN connection might not work most of the time because you have to download a client and install it, so an interim solution for secure access from on-premise locations to the cloud is what I want to see in Azure Data Factory.

I have not found any real shortcomings within the product.

Azure Data Factory can improve by having support in the drivers for change data capture.

Areas for improvement would be the product's performance and its mapping of data flow. In addition, some of the optimization techniques are not scalable, some naming connections are not supported, and automated testing is not supported in all cases. In the next release, I would like to see support so we can enhance based on the next-level pipelines, writing from scratch, flexible scheduling, and pipeline activity.

My only problem is the seamless connectivity with various other databases, for example, SAP. Our transaction data there, all the maintenance data, is maintained in SAP. That seamless connectivity is not there. 

Basically, it could have some specific APIs that allow it to connect to the traditional ERP systems. That'll make it more powerful. With Oracle, it's pretty good at this already. However, when it comes to SAP, SAP has its native applications, which are the way it is written. It's very much AWS with SAP Cloud, so when it comes to Azure, it's difficult to fetch data from SAP.

The initial setup is a bit complex. It's likely a company may need to enlist assistance.

Technical support is lacking in terms of responsiveness.

I'd like to see videos on YouTube or the Microsoft site with more detailed implementations. The solution lacks a decent UI that allows us to see what kinds of requests are for what objects and how the population of objects is being requested and compared. Right now we have to look at logs to get an idea of what types of calls the data factory receives in what sequence, for example. It would be nice to be able to see it graphically because we currently have to interpret the logs and then create a graphical representation to have an idea of what's going on. In general, it could be simplified and made more user-friendly.

I was planning to switch to Synapse and was just looking into Synapse options.

I wanted to plug things in and then put them into Power BI. Basically, I'm planning to shift some data, leveraging the skills I wanted to use Synapse for performance.

I am not a frequent user, and I am not an Azure Data Factory engineer or data engineer. I work as an enterprise architect. Data Factory, in essence, becomes a component of my solution. I see the fitment and plan on using it. It could be Azure Data Factory or Data Lake, but I'm not sure what enhancements it would require.

User-friendliness and user effectiveness are unquestionably important, and it may be a good option here to improve the user experience. However, I believe that more and more sophisticated monitoring would be beneficial.

It's a good idea to take a Microsoft course. Because they are really helpful when you start from your journey with Data Factory.

Data Factory's performance during heavy data processing isn't great.

We didn't have a very good experience. The first steps were very easy but it turned out that we used Europe for a Microsoft data center, also partly abroad for our alpha notes. As soon as we started using Azure Data Factory, the bills got higher and higher. At first we couldn't understand why, but it is very expensive to put data into a data center abroad. So instead, we decided to use only Northern Europe, which worked out for a while in the beginning. And then we had nothing to show for it. They gave me a really hard time for this.

Azure Data Factory should be cheaper to move data to a data center abroad for calamities in case of disasters.

What I really miss is the integration of Microsoft TED quality services and Microsoft Data services. If they were to combine those features in Data Factory, I think they would have a very strong proposition. They promise something like that on Microsoft Congress. That was years ago and it's still not here.

It would be better if it had machine learning capabilities. For example, at the moment, we're working with Databricks and Azure Data Factory. But Databricks is very complex to do the different data flows. It could be great to have more functionalities to do that in Azure Data Factory.

I'm more of a general manager. I don't have any insights in terms of missing features or items of that nature.

Integration of data lineage would be a nice feature in terms of DevOps integration. It would make implementation for a company much easier. I'm not sure if that's already available or not. However, that would be a great feature to add if it isn't already there.

At this point in time, they should work on somehow integrating the big data capabilities within it. I have not explored it, but it would be good if somehow we could call a Spark job or something to do with the Spark SQL within ADS so that we wouldn't need a Spark tested outside.

On the UI side, they could make it a little more intuitive in terms of how to add the radius components. Somebody who has been working with tools like Informatica or DataStage gets very used to how the UI looks and feels. 

In ADS, adding a new table or joining a new table and overriding that with an override SQL that I could customize would be helpful.

Being able to debug from the design mode itself would be helpful.

Improvement could be made around streaming data because I feel that the Data Factory product is mainly geared for batch processing and doesn't yet have in-built streaming data processing. Perhaps it's on the way and they are making some changes to help facilitate that. If they were to include better monitoring that would be useful. I'd like to see improved notifications of what the actual errors are.

Data Factory has so many features that it can be a little difficult or confusing to find some settings and configurations. I'm sure there's a way to make it a little easier to navigate.

In the main ADF web portal could, there's a section for monitoring jobs that are currently running so you can see if recent jobs have failed. There's an app for working with Azure in general where you can look at some segs in your account. It would be nice if Azure had an app that lets you access the monitoring layer of Data Factory from your phone or a tablet, so you could do a quick check-in on the status of certain jobs. That could be useful.

Some stuff can be better, however, overall it's fine.

The performance and stability are touch and go.

The deployment should be easier.

We’d like the management of the solution to run a little more smoothly.

The need to work more on developing out-of-the-box connectors for other products like Oracle, AWS, and others.

It does not appear to be as rich as other ETL tools. It has very limited capabilities. It simply moves data around. It's not very good after that because it's taking the data to the next level and modeling it.

There is always room to improve. There should be good examples of use that, of course, customers aren't always willing to share. It is Catch-22. It would help the user base if everybody had really good examples of deployments that worked, but when you ask people to put out their good deployments, which also includes me, you usually got, "No, I'm not going to do that." They don't have enough good examples. Microsoft probably just needs to pay one of their partners to build 20 or 30 examples of functional Data Factories and then share them as a user base.

This solution is currently only useful for basic data movement and file extractions, which we would like to see developed to handle more complex data transformations.

There are limitations when processing more than one GD file. 

Data ingestion pipelines sometimes fail because of transient issues that have to do with the cloud network. It takes more than six hours to process or ingest 300,000 records and that is a long time. 

There should be a way that it can do switches, so if at any point in time I want to do some hybrid mode of making any data collections or ingestions, I can just click on a button. I can change a switch and make sure a batch can be a streaming process.

The user interface could use improvement. It's not a major issue but it's something that can be improved. 

It has the ability to create separate folders to organize objects, Data Factory objects. But any time that we created a folder we were not able to create objects. We had to drag and drop into the folder. There were no default options. It was manual work. We offered their team our feedback and they accepted my request.

The tool’s workflow is not user-friendly. It should also improve its orchestration monitoring.

Data Factory could be improved in terms of data transformations by adding more metadata extractions.

There is room for improvement primarily in its streaming capabilities. For structured streaming and machine learning model implementation within an ETL process, it lags behind tools like Informatica. 

Snowflake is also more efficient for loading data into Snowflake, whether from Blob storage or AWS. From our experience, ADF is mainly useful for batch processing. I'm not sure how its streaming capabilities compare to others for industry-wide use cases.

One of the features that still is in development is data privacy to the cloud side of the SAP integration.

Data Factory's monitorability could be better. In the next release, Data Factory should include integrations with open-source tools like Air Flow.

The pricing scheme is very complex and difficult to understand. Analyzing it upfront is impossible, so we just decided to start using it and figure out the costs on a weekly or monthly basis.

Because I have not really done a really deep benchmark against competitors, I may not be familiar enough with the potential of competing products and capabilities to be able able to say what is missing or should be improved definitively.  

From my perspective, the pricing seems like it could be more user-friendly. Of course, nothing is ever as inexpensive as you want.  

Perhaps one good additional feature would be incorporating more ways to import and export data. It would be nice to have the product fit our service orchestration platform better to make the transfer more fluid.  

Understanding the pricing model for Data Factory is quite complex. It needs to be simplified, and easier to understand.

We have experienced some issues with the integration. This is an area that needs improvement.

Data Factory is embedded in the new Synapse Analytics. The problem is if you're using the core Data Factory, you can't call a notebook within Synapse. It's possible to call Databricks from Data Factory, but not the Spark notebook and I don't understand the reason for that restriction. To my mind, the solution needs to be more connectable to its own services.

There is a list of features I'd like to see in the next release, most of them related to oversight and security. AWS has a lake builder, which basically enforces the whole oversight concept from the start of your pipeline but unfortunately Microsoft hasn't yet implemented a similar feature.

I would like to see this time travel feature in Snowflake added to Azure Data Factory. In addition to taking care of data internally, how it is instead of using indexing, they have some different mechanisms to quickly execute the query instead of normal indexes. Both of these would be great to see implemented in future upgrades.

One area for improvement is documentation. At present, there isn't enough documentation on how to use Azure Data Factory in certain conditions. It would be good to have documentation on the various use cases.

Sometimes, it's really difficult to find the answers to very technical questions regarding certain conditions.

We use this solution within a limited context, specifically for extracting data and moving it to the Azure Cloud to develop our BI solution. Based on our usage, we have not found any challenges using the solution but have not explored every feature. The one element of the solution that we have used and could be improved is the user interface. 

The speed and performance can be further improved.

This solution should be able to connect with custom APIs.

Data Flow is in the early stages — currently public preview — and it is growing into a tool that will offer everything other ETL tools offer. There are a few features still to come. The thing we missed most was data update, but this is now available as of two weeks ago. A feature that is confirmed as coming soon is the ability to pass in a parameter and filter, etc.

We have had some issues, but it's critical to use Data Factory for what it was designed for. It's not very good for iteration processes for loop data activity because you must wait for the runtime. This is a downgrade, but we developed some workaround for it, and we're running the Azure function for these iteration processes.

There's space for improvement in the development process of the data pipelines.

The only thing I wish it had was real-time replication when replicating data over, rather than just allowing you to drop all the data and replace it. It would be beneficial if you could replicate it.

Real-time replication is required, and this is not a simple task.

Snowflake connectivity was recently added and if the vendor provided some videos on how to create data then that would be helpful. I think that everything is there, but we need more tutorials.

There is no built-in function for automatically adding notifications concerning the progress or outline of a pipeline run. I believe this requires a bit of development through power ups, but it would be nice to have a task for firing off an email through the GUI.

I'm not sure if I have any complaints about the solution at the moment. There are a few bits and pieces that we would like to see improved. These include improvements related to the solution's ease of use and some quality flash upgrades. However, these are minor complaints. 

If the user interface was more user friendly and there was better error feedback, it would be helpful.

We are too early into the entire cycle for us to really comment on what problems we face. We're mostly using it for transformations, like ETL tasks. I think we are comfortable with the facts or the facts setting. But for other parts, it is too early to comment on.

We are still in the development phase, testing it on a very small set of data, maybe then the neatest four or bigger set of data. Then, you might get some pain points once we put it in place and run it. That's when it will be more effective for me to answer that.

The setup and configuration process could be simplified.

The only thing that we're struggling with is increasing the competency of my team. So we think that the Microsoft documentation is too complicated.

I would like to see it more connected. I know they're working on the Snowflake data warehouse connector, but more connectors would be helpful.

It can improve from the perspective of active logging. It can provide active logging information.

It should provide support for changing data capture on several other platforms.

The number of standard adaptors could be extended further. What we find is that if we develop data integration solutions with Data Factory, there's still quite a bit of coding involved, whereas we'd like to move in a direction with less coding and more select-and-click.

The solution could use some merge statements.

The solution should offer better integration with Azure machine learning. We should be able to embed the cognitive services from Microsoft, for example as a web API. It should allow us to embed Azure machine learning in a more user-friendly way. 

I think more integration with existing Azure platform services would be extremely beneficial.

In the next release, it's important that some sort of scheduler for running tasks is added.  A built-in scheduling mechanism for running the treasury will be a very helpful improvement.

It would be helpful if they could adjust the data capture feature so that when there are source-side changes ADF could automatically figure it out.  

The solution needs to integrate more with other providers and should have a closer integration with Oracle BI.